'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.' [‎172r] (348/386)

85
6. We enclose, for your information, the recent correspondence on this
subject noted in the schedule annexed.
42
India. Office, London,
9th September 1904.
•To Foreign Office, dated 18th May 1904.
From ditto, dated iStli J uly 1901, and enclosures.
To ditto, dated Ifith August 19* 4.
From ditto, dated 29th August 1904.
Secret,
No. 41.
To His Excellency the Right Honourable the Governor-General
of India in Council
My LoAd,
With reference to the letter from the Government of India, No. 77*
(Secret—External) of the 31st March last,
I forward herewith a copy of correspond
ence with the Eoreign Office on the
subject of the proposal to conclude a pro
tectorate treaty with Sheikh Ahmed*bin*Thani of El Katr.
2. Your Excellency will observe that Bis Majesty's Ambassador at
Constantinople regrets that a further question should he raised with the
Turkish Government at the present moment, when there are already other
matters of importance under discussion between the Porte and His ^Majesty's
Government, and that he does not consider that the conclusion of the proposed
agreement with Sheikh Ahmed is warranted by the delay of the Turkish Govern
ment in cancelling the Mudirate at Wakra. It appears, however, from
His Excellency’s despatch of 28th June 1904, that he considers that such an
agreement might he justified to the Turkish Government, on the ground
that its object is to give His Majesty’s Government the right to restrain ioreign
interference in El katr, without attempting in any other way to disturb the
status quo, so far as the Turkish Government is concerned.
3. The decision, therefore, depends upon the question whether the objects
to he attained by the proposed agreement are of sufficient importance to
counterbalance the suspicion and ill-will which it would be calculated to
arouse in the minds of the Turkish Government. The El Katr coast at present
constitutes a break in the continuity of our maritime influence along the
shores of this part of the Gulf, lying as it does between the island of Bahrein
and the Pirate Coast. The absence of any agreement with the Sheikh may
prove, in certain contingencies, a hindrance to the proper exercise y His
Majesty’s ships of their duties in the suppression ol piracy and the maintenance
of the peace of the Gulf. It also presents a difficulty Ox considerable impor
tance from the point of view of the protection of the pearl-fisheries fiom outside
interference, to which reference is made in your letter under reply.
4 The argument which Sir N. O’Conor bases on the multiplicity of points
in the’Persian Gulf re-arding which he is simultaneously pressing the
Ot^fn GoTernmtt Js n of some weight, and it seems doubtful whether tlie
considerations referred to iu the second part of the preceding paragraph are of
such immediate and urgent importance as to justify immediate action in .pite
of his reluctance to add at present to his difficulties with the Turkish Lrovern-
111611 5. I shall therefore await a further expression of your views by telegraph
before authority is given to you to conclude an agreement with Sheikh
Ahmed, even
N. O’Conor.
with the precautions and reservations suggested by Sir
I have the honour to be,
My Lord,
Your Lordship’s most obedient humble servant,
sr. JOHN BHODRICK.