'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.' [‎164r] (332/386)

69
put forward by the French Consul, as being contrary to the Declaration of 1862.
We feel confident that in any subsequent discussion between the two Govern-
ments, which may result from tliis protest, His Majesty’s Government will
give full consideration to the Sultan’s rights and wishes in the matter, and
that the danger of permitting the establishment of a French colony in Oman
will be duly borne in mind.
Enclosure to 3i.
MEMORANDUM ON THE USE OF THE FRENCH FLAG BY
SUBJECTS OF THE SULTAN OF MASKAf.
In 1S91 reports were received from the Government of Bombay From c. 1668-1858, the East India Company’s administration in the city of Bombay [Mumbai] and western India. From 1858-1947, a subdivision of the British Raj. It was responsible for British relations with the Gulf and Red Sea regions. and from
the Resident in the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. that the French Consular officers at Aden,
Obokh and Zanzibar bad, on numerous occasions, given French papers and the
French flag to Native vessels belonging to Sur and other places within the
territory of the Suit in of Maskat. In passing on these reports to the Secretary
* Secret despatch No. 92 (Extern..!), dated the of State, * the Government of India
9 ;hJune i8 <u. . m expressed the opinion that the action of
f (The action alleged to have been taken by the ji t, i /'i i i . i i ,
Consuls at Obokh aul Madagascar required Veri- tllO rreilCll LOHSUl at Aden") amounted
fication ) to an assertion of protection over Oman,
and that the French Government should be requested to put a stop to his
proceedings.
Shortly after the matter had been referred to Her Majesty’s Government,
a further report was received from the Resident at Bushire to the effect that
the Sub an of Maskat proposed himself to address a representation to the
French Government, protesting against the issue of French flags and papers to
vessels belonging to his subjects. His Highness represented that the sole
object of the dhow A term adopted by British officials to refer to local sailing vessels in the western Indian Ocean. -owners in assuming French j^rotection was to obtain a cloak
for slave-dealing operations. The Government of India, while holding that
it was undesirable that the Sultan should address a protest direct to the French
Government, informed the Resident that the use of the French flag by Maskat
subjects could have no effect as against His Highness. The Sultan, it was
averred, “has full authority to punish any of his subjects who may infringe
the laws of his country, whatever flag or papers they may have accepted; and
he may safely take any steps he pleases to uphold bis jurisdiction in his own
■waters over such of his subjects as have got French flags.” A copy of the
Resident’s report and of the reply from the Government of India was forwarded
to the Secretary of State with Secret despatch No. 117 (External), dated the
25th August 1891.
In replying to these two despatches, the Secretary of State forTvardedf a
t Secret despitch No. 441 , dated the 4th Decein- copy of correspondence with the Foreign
Office, from which it appeared that the
French Government had repud’ated the action of the French Consul at Aden
in granting French papers and flags to the Suri dhows, and had given an
assurance that it would not be repeated.
It appeared, however, from further reports received from Bombay and
Bushire that the statement regarding the grant of flags and papers at Mada
gascar and Obokh was not without foundation. These reports were forwarded
to London with Secret despatches Nos. 46, 66 and 98 (External), dated,
respectively, the 23rd March, 4th May and 7th June 1892.
The subject was again brought to the notice of the Government of India in
1894 in connection with the appointment of a French Vice-Consul at Maskat.
The Sultan, having reason to believe that this appointment was likely to be
made, was considerably disturbed at the prospect. He anticipated, in fact, that
the only object of sending a French Consular representative to Maskat was to
assert French protection over the Arabs of Sur who had accepted French flags
and papers. The Resident referred the matter to the Government of India,
and was informed that, in the event of the French Vice-Consul putting forward
such a claim, the Sultan should be advised to “ refer him to the Declaration,
dated the 10th March 1862, respecting the independence of Maskat ami