PZ 4718/1934 ‘Historical Memorandum on Bahrein.’ [‎8v] (16/48)

F.O. to Teh.
No. 38 of
7.8 1845.
t ^ t ul /!? e w ®rit%lTe4drBce E oftbisf thtt from
about S1 ] a 300 A.D. the ^^^^pa^an^had paid
in the P«essioii of th in 1783 by the Uttabi
revenue to them unm u h lik j e presents have
Arabs, from winch tribe - ; that Her
generally been sent o 1 j d t j ie position when
Majesty’s Government had reco ms P attack
they -arn^ Mehemet of Egyptm^i^.^ ^ rathei . of
the San Gnlfl ‘‘ and that accordingly the British Govern
ment would not allow him to extend the hand of possession
over that island ” ; that the British authorities had formally
and repeatedly asked Persia to rent the island to them and
that British representatives at Tehran bad frequen y
declared that Her Majesty’s Government had no right what
ever to the Gulf or its islands [there is no foundation for
either statement]; and that the fact that Captain Bruces
treaty was on record supported the Persian claim ihe
following extract, which (except as regards the initial date)
appears correctly to represent the true facts, may, however,
be placed on record from the Prime Minister’s memorandum :
“In the commencement of the reign of His Majesty the late
Shah, the Arabs of Beni Attahi canm from the desert and
conquered the island by sea. Ihe object and desne of tho
Persian Government has since always been and is the
fVi q t island from its snoilers.”
49. Her Majesty’s Government, in view of the unlikeli
hood that Persia had, or could give effect to, any serious
designs in Bahrein and the undesirability of engaging in
those circumstances in a correspondence which might merely
cause irritation without serving any useful purpose,
instructed the Minister at Tehran not to revert to the
subject unless it was forced upon him by the Persian Prime
Minister. In that case he was to employ certain arguments
supplied to him (apparently the critical comments of the
Secret Committee Pre-1784, the Committee responsible for protecting East India Company shipping. Post-1784, its main role was to transmit communications between the Board of Control and the Company's Indian governments on matters requiring secrecy. of the East India Company on the Prime
Minister’s memorandum) to show generally the grounds on
which Her Majesty’s Government were “ unable to recognise
as valid the claims advanced by Persia to the sovereignty of
Bahrein, and you may add that they would . . . very much
disapprove of any attempts on the part of Persia to interfere
in the affairs of that island and thus disturb the peace of
the Gulf and to afford an opening to piracy.” The question
appears to have dropped for the time being.
Lor. I. 877.
Lor. T, 877.
Lor. I, 880.
j. rviuy uj l eace wun \ v anabi,
Tribute (1847).
50. Meanwhile, the ex-Sheikh (who in 1845 had unsuccess-
tdly attempted to capture Bahrein with the aid of the
Wahabis) had been invited in June 1846 by the Governor-
-teneral of Pars to return to Bushire, where he should be
liberally ^entertained “ until ... the season for action had
m , 16 declm ed the invitation. In October 1846
call h^thp 1 T m1 ^ ftAh 6 P ermi8 ? ion of ‘be Resident to
Bahrein T! ° f the Arab littora l against
, ,, [ . T118 was refused. A request by the ruling Sheikh
SheikhofTleb. be aU ° We ? Cal1 . in th ® assistance of the
November 184^® irAuguI a i h 847 S a W T eq t uall f y p ef ’ ,sed in
r “s. varh «r-r-jss t *
*1 n n A wim vreat Britain, 1847.