'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.' [‎169v] (343/386)

80
French to raise questions as to the language of the Saltan’s intimation. Let
me have your observations as soon as possible. The Sultan’s letter to the
French ATce-Consul might be to the following effect:—
The Sultan understands that the question of the exemption from his
jurisdiction of three of his subjects, who hold French flags, is to be referred to
an impartial international tribunal by the Governments of Great Britain and
France. This reference is most satisfactory to His Highness, but it may
occupy some time before a definite opinion is given.
On the (here insert date) he imprisoned three of his Suri subjects who
were alleged to be in possession of French flags, and who claimed exemption
from his jurisdiction. As the question of principle is about to be disposed of
in a satisfactory manner, His Highness does not consider it necessary to impose
further imprisonment on these men. He has, therefore, directed them to be
released, taking from them an engagement that they will present themselves
eventually to the authority which may be held by the arbitral decision to have
jurisdiction in the matter.
35
Telegram, dated the 22nd May 1903.
From—His Majesty’s Secretary of State for India, London,
To—His Excellency the Viceroy, Simla.
French Government accept Lord Lansdowne’s proposals conveyed in my
second telegram of 21st May. This is satisfactory. When Lord Lansdowne
and Gambon have signed Agreement enbodying whole terms of the settlement,
a further communication will be made to you as to the mode of giving effect
to arrangement at Maskat.
38
No. 159 (Secret—External), dated Simla, the 4th September 1902.
From—The Government of India in the Foreign Department,
To—The Right Hon’ble Lokd George F. Hamilton, His Majesty’s Secretary of
State for India.
In connection with the endeavours which have recently been made to check
the importation of arms and ammunition into Persia, our attention has been
drawn to the position of Gwadur, as a port through which arms can be imported
into Baluch-Makran and the interior of Persia.
2. As Your Lordship is aware, Gwadur has been in possession of the
Bulers of Maskat since the close of the 18th century, when it was conferred
upon Saiyid Sultan, a Maskat refugee, by the Khan of Kalat.
In 1891, at the instance of our 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. at Maskat, the Sultan issued
an order prohibiting the import or export of arms and ammunition to or from
Gwadur territory. We have, however, reason to believe that this prohibition has
not always been observed, and we have recently found it necessary to call the
Sultan s attention to the matter, and to advise him to direct his representative
at Gwadur to confiscate all arms and ammunition which may be landed on
the coast within Maskat jurisdiction. This advice the Sultan readily undertook
to follow. J
3. In reporting the result of his communication to the Sultan, our Political
Agent at Maskat observed that, primd facie, the prohibitory proclamation
issued by the Sultan in 1891, and his present action in enforcing the prohibi
tion, seemed to be incompatible with the terms of Article 11 of the French
Treaty with Maskat of Ibll—40 : but that, as no objection had been raised by
the French to the former notification, it appeared unnecessary to anticipate
that any would be raised in the present case. In order to obviate any