'Egyptian Claims to Sovereignty over the Somali Coast.' [‎6r] (11/62)

11
Pasha An Ottoman title used after the names of certain provincial governors, high-ranking officials and military commanders. at Berbera, as a matter of courtesy. In reporting the matter
• Political, dated 15th January 1870, t,,e Government of India wrote :*
No. io. l n our opinion the Resident cannot
“ be allowed to bombard a fort flying
“ the Egyptian flag, unless it be certain that the flag is not rightfully
“ hoisted. We would, therefore, suggest that Her Majesty’s Government
“ should call on the Egyptian Government to state distinctly whether
“ E gypt hays claim to Ainterad. If so, the Egyptian Government might
“ be called upon to pay compensation. If not, it will rest with the
“ British Government to take its own measures to obtain redress. It
t( will, no doubt, occur to your Lordship that this case is complicated by
<c the fact that the Egyptian claim to the African coast from Suez to
“ Cape Guardafui remains undecided.”
The papers were sent to the Foreign Office,f with an intimation of
t Sir L. Mullet to Foreign Office, Salisbury’s opinion that, in the
13th February 1875. present stage o± the question as to the
sovereignty over the Somali coast, and in
the absence of the further information on that subject promised by the
Government of India, it would be of doubtful policy to make any refer
ence to the Khedive in the sense indicated by that Government, and a
suggestion that the case might be dealt with by a blockade of Ainterad,
if such a measure did not involve hazard of giving just cause of offence
to the Egyptian Government.
Lord I)erby,J however, considered that no decision could he arrived at
} From Foreign Office, 20th Feb- to the course which should he followed
ruary 1875. until the larger question of Egyptian
rights over the Somali coast had been
settled. The action taken by Her Majesty’s Government would involve
a practical decision on the point in dispute, whatever line of policy might
be decided. An appeal to the Egyptian Government for reparation
would be a practical recognition of their right of authority over Ainterad,
while, on the other hand, if orders were given by Her Majesty’s Govern
ment to blockade and bombard the place, one of two things would be
affirmed,—either that the Egyptians had no jurisdiction there, or that
they were not in a position to enforce it. Under these circumstances,
Lord Derby thought that it would be wiser to await the report of the
Indian Government upon the encroachments of Egypt on the Somali
coast when the question of sovereignty could he treated as a whole, and
not in an incidental manner.
The expected report was sent home in a Secret Letter, No. 12, dated
5th March 1875, in the shape of a memorandum embodying all the
information in possession of the Government of India and procurable
from local records. Further reference to this document is unnecessary,
except in regard to the particular point on which the Foreign Office had
requested details, viz., the origin of the Turkish claim to Zeyla. It
appeared that that place had been a dependency of Mokha, and that
when the Porte obtained the final mastery over the Bed Sea Arabian
coast in 1842-43 it inherited the possessions on the African side which,
as then understood, were confined to Zeyla and Tajourra.
Before the above information had been received, the occurrence at
Ainterad, and the necessity of furnishing the Resident at Aden with a
clear rule for his guidance, had satisfied Lord Salisbury that it was
desirable to ascertain, with as little delay as possible, the view which
Lord Derby entertained as to the Egyptian claims. His Lordship’s own
views were expressed in a letter § to
the Foreign Office, dated 23rd March
1875, of which the material paragraphs
were as follows :—
“ In my letter of the 25th September last, I drew your attention to
£ ‘ certain stipulations in our treaty engagements with the Sultans of
§ Sir L. Mallet to Foreign Office,
dated 23rd March 1875.