Aden Delimitation: The History of the Question and the Present Situation as Regards the Territories of the Amir of Dthali [‎20r] (9/14)

'
lieadmcnof the district were politically supporters of his cousin and rival '
Abdulla hm Muhammad Musaid; also that with these latter the Turkish
officials were continually intriguing. In fact the district had not settled
down, ana could not be expected to have settled down, under the circum
stances, without the presence on the spot of a British Agent with an escort
° f i U f 0< ^l • ! CP n rt ’ therefoi ‘ e ’ while showing in a general wav
w lat Ah hm Mokhbil actually possessed on the plateau at the time of his visit,
does not indicate, except by the <: old Amiri boundary line ” on the map, the
limits ol the country which should have lieen his by right. The old Amiri
boundary line appears to me to very nearly agree with°the line now claimed
by the British Commission, and it will no doubt be noted that Hunter makes
Jabal Jahaf range the Amir’s western boundary. He thus distinctly includes
the villages at its eastern foot ; and as regards the country to the west of
the range, the Sheikhs of which are dependent on Dthali/though paving-
little or no revenue, nothing seems to have been known about^it at this
period.
19. In forwaiding Colonel Hunters Beport, General Loch represented
t iat, in consequence of the failure of the attempts to come to an arrangement
with the Turks regarding the Amiri boundary, the fact of continued Turkish
a §S r ® ss i° n had to be laced. Ibis was followed by a letter reporting the Fnc. in
activity of the lurks within the Amirs jurisdiction, and their intrigues with Bombay
the Sayads of Dthubiyat, which is a place considerably to the°south of Letter
Hthali. Xo - 32 > 26th
June/80.
20. Her Majesty’s Government then proposed “ an arbitral delimitation ”
of the Dthali frontier, by a British cilicer, in concert with the Turkish
authorities. But this did not suit the Turkish Government, who, instead,
raised the old claim of the Sultan of lurkey to the whole of Arabia, and
even went so far as to complain of the purchase of certain lands in the
neighbourhood of Aden from the Sultan of Lahej. Lord Granville replied
in a Bespatch. dated 10th January ISbB, in which he expressed the surprise h C 21 s 3
of Her Majesty's Government at the renewal of pretensions which had so
often been declared to he inadmissible, and stated that Her Majesty’s
Government had no intention of withdrawing from the position they had
consistently maintained, nor did they recognise the right of the Porte to
raise any question as to their dealings with the rulers of Lahej or Dhali.
Lord Granville added that the demarcation of the boundary was considered
essential “ in order to prevent the constant renewal of discussions between
the two Governments.”
21. Still the Turkish Government would not agree to a demarcation, and
matters continued in an unsatisfactory state. The question was then first
raised of establishing a regular protectorate over the tribes in the neighbour
hood of Adeu, and in August 1886 Lord Dufferin proposed that an effective Government
protectorate should be established, once for all, over the Arab tribes from of India
Sheikh Sayad (opposite to Perim) to the frontiers of Oman. “ We would s ^ ret
“ then ask the Turks to consent to a delimitation of our protected territorv in the
“ direction of theirs. If they agreed we would enter into a formal convention
“ with them. If not, we would lay down the limits of the protectorate without
“ their consent- and make them respect them. As to the Dthali territory,
“ we would make some concessions to the Turks if they could in this way he
“ induced to enter into a convention. In dealing with other tribes in
“ the vicinity of Aden it would he necessary to avoid including within our
“ limits any tracts which would he likely to gravitate of their own
“ accord to the Turks.”
22. I do not understand from this that Lord Dufferin intended to yield
to the Turks any territory, whether included in that belonging to the “ nine
tribes,” or to other tribes to which protection might he extended, the
Sheikhs and people of which were unwilling to become Turkish subjects.
There is a note to paragraph 5 of the Despatch which would seem to mply
that the Government of India did not mean to allow the Turks to encroach
the territories of the Amir, although Major Hunter had actually
Letn-r No.
3 J, datvd Gth
Aug./SO.
suggested, that
uplands. 5
S. 28.
should
allowed to absorb
Dufferin
was apparently
B