'SUMMARY OF THE PRINCIPAL EVENTS AND MEASURES OF THE VICEROYALTY OF HIS EXCELLENCY LORD CURZON OF KEDLESTON, VICEROY AND GOVERNOR-GENERAL OF INDIA IN THE FOREIGN DEPARTMENT. I. JANUARY 1899-APRIL 1904. II. DECEMBER 1904-NOVEMBER 1905. VOLUME IV. PERSIA AND THE PERSIAN GULF.' [‎163v] (331/386)

G8
destinies of bis country therefore oan be considered in isolation from the
physical and political environment to which they appertain. If on the one band
the connection with British India is as close as it has here been shown to be, on
the other or Persian side, it is by British efforts, and by British efforts alone,
that those seas have been pacified, their waters surveyed, their commerce
developed, and their security assured. It is impossible in our opinion that this
two-fold association of the State of Maskat should be ignored, or that the results
of a century’s laborious service on the part of Great Britain should be thrown
into jeopardy by an interference, dictated by other reasons, and devoid of any
apparent connection with the locality itself.
No. 41-(Secret Exterml), dated Fort William, the 27th February 1902.
From—The Government of India in the Foreign Department,
To-r-The Right Hos’ble Loud George F. Hamilton, His Majesty’s Secretary of
State for India.
'With reference to the correspondence ending with Your Lordship’s Secret
telegram, dated the 8th February 1002, we have the honour to forward copies
of the iurther papers noted in the enclosed list, regarding the use of the French
flag by subjects of the Sultan of ]\Xaskat, with a copy of a memorandum,
dated the 21st October 1901, which gives a resumS of the previous correspond-*
enee.
2. The letter from the Political Agent A mid-ranking political representative (equivalent to a Consul) from the diplomatic corps of the Government of India or one of its subordinate provincial governments, in charge of a Political Agency. , Maskat, No. 1, dated the 2nd Jan
uary 1902, contains his observations upon the memorandum which was left by
the French Ambassador at the Foreign Office on the 14th August 1901. In view
of the facts disci ised by Captain Cox in this and previous communications, we
aie unable to acquiesce in At. Cambons assurance that adequate enquirv has
been made into the alleged irregularities in the grant of French flags and papers,
or that the charges against the French flag-holders of being implicated in the
slave trade are unfounded. Nor can we accept the version given by M. Gambon
of the visit cff the Sultan toSur, which occurred in June 1900, and* of the action
taken by His Highness on that occasion.
3. W bile, however, we are compelled to endorse the criticisms passed by
Captain Cox upon M Gambon’s statements, we desire to add that the q nestions
of the irregularity in the grant of French flags and papers and of the share taken
by the French flag-holders in the slave trade are, in our opinion, of subsidiary
importance. The real point at issue is, we consider, the degree to which the
possession of French flags and papers by the subjects of the Sultan should
render the holders exempt from the Sultan’s authority in his own territory and
territorial waters Your Lordship will observe from our letter to Captain
Cox, Jso. 1330-L.-A , dated the 8th August 1901, that the object which we have
particularly in view is to strengthen the Saltan’s administration at Sur and to
render him competent to enforce obedience from his subjects ; and that we
ha\ e suggested measures to that end. These measures must depend for their
efficacy upon the support which His Majesty’s Government are prepared to
accord to us in the position winch we have already assumed on more than one
occasion, namely, that the possession of French flags and papers by Maskat sub-
jects c oos not entitle them to French protection in’Oman^nd that any attempt
made by a foieiyn Power to assert such protection is an infringement of the
Anglo-French Declaration of 1862. We would invite Your Lordship’s special
attention to the correspondence enclosed in Mr. Fowler’s despatch No. 48
( crct), dated the IJlh October 1894, which shows that the advice to this effect,
i uch "as given to the Sultan by the Government of India in 1891, received
the approval of Her Majesty’s Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
t,™ ^ d hts position, as Your Lordship has already been informed, has now
stand oT^hslTnf ,h W by tl ,‘ e / rcnch 0oDSul Maskat, acting, as ive under-
. and, on behalf of the Prench Government. With the approval of His Maies-
tj s Government, we have authorised Captain Cox to protest against the claim