File 4949/1912 Pt 5 Persian Gulf: Abu Musa oxide [‎11v] (22/592)

22
India. Such an agreement was entirely outside
the ordinary incidents of the partnership business,
and it would require strong evidence to show that
Hassan was in a position to enter into it without
the knowledge or consent of his associates,
especially as there was no need to carry matters
through in a hurry, and the short delay necessary
to enable the other partners to be consulted would
not have prejudiced the conclusion of the agree
ment, provided that they had raised no objection.
The principal evidence on which the German p. 21 .
Government rely consists of an unsigned document pp. 39 , 40 .
(Annex 14 to Second German Memorandum),
purporting to be a memorandum of association
between the lessees, the first clause of which is
alleged to give power to Hassan Samieh to con
clude sales on behalf of the partnership. This
document is said to have been drawn up by Abdul p. 21.
Latif, and sent by him in a letter dated the
6th January, 1899 (Annex 13 to Second German pp. 38, 3 ( J.
Memorandum), to Hassan Samieh, with a request
that all the partners at Lingah should sign. It
is further alleged that the document was signed p. 21.
by Hassan Samieh, Abdullah, and Nakhoda Ali,
who added a clause providing for the purchase of
boats, and returned the document to Abdul Latif.
On the 21 st January, IS99, A.bdul Latif wrote a
letter to Hasson Samieh (Annex 40 to Second pp. 06 , 57.
German Memorandum), in which he objected to pp. 21 , 22 .
the purchase of boats. Hassan Samieh then
replied agreeing to the cancellation of the boats,
and thereupon the arrangement is said to have
become operative.
No evidence, except Abdul Latif’s two letters,
is produced in support of the statements made.
It appears from Abdul Latif’s second letter
that when Hassan Samieh and his partners at
Lingah returned the document to Abdul .Latif
with the additional clause about the boats they
made certain other suggestions in a covering
letter. Abdul Latif objected to these suggestions
as well as to the provision about the boats, and
there is no ground for alleging that the arrange
ment became operative merely because Hassan
agreed to waive the provision about boats.
It is not suggested by the German Government
that the memorandum was ever signed by the other
partners, Sheikh Sagar, Esa-bin-Abdul Latif, and
Mr. Malcolm, who, as stated on p. 12 of the
Second German Memorandum, was a partner in
the company, but who had entered it, not “ two