File 1166/1925 'Arabia: Nejd; negotiations with Ibn Saud regarding Iraq-Nejd question and Trans-Jordan boundary; Sir G Clayton's mission; Bahra agreement, 2nd November, 1925' [‎136v] (279/769)

a flag-. Sa'dun, however, went to some tribes near the border and
pretending- he came with orders from Ibn Sa ud, persuaded them
to join him in raiding tribes across the frontier. His Highness was
very angry when he heard of this and took immediate steps to
recover all looted property which was returned to the tribes, who had
since stated that all their losses had been made good. King Faisal
however, had sent for Sa‘dun and asked why he had played this
trick, to which Sa‘dun replied that he had thought his action would
please the ‘Iraq Government and annoy Ibn Sa‘ud. Sa‘dun was
loaded with presents and made much of and is said now to be in
the service of the ‘Iraq Government. His Highness thought this
case had a bearing on the point in question.
I pointed out that Sa‘dun had started^ on his exploit as an ‘Iraqi
and not as a subject of Nejd, and if h's Government accepted his
version of the affair that was their responsibility.
Ibn Sa‘ud said that the tribes who had raided with Sa'dun had
been punished by him and that afterwards they had gone to ‘Iraq.
I agreed that the story, if true, which I was not in a position to
admit, was instructive, but I did not think it supported His High
ness’ arguments. In such a case the proper course would have
been to deal suitably with Yusuf Sa'dun but not to have endeavoured
to attract those tribes to come over. If the two governments acted
loyally towards each other I did not see that the principle to which
he attached so great importance was in fact essential.
Ibn Sa'ud asked what would happen If a tribe raided in its own
cpuntry and then sought refuge in another. I agreed that such
cases might occasionally occur but, even if an Extradition Treaty
were in force it could not be applied to political offenders. All the
same I could see that it was His Highness’ point of view that it
would assist him in governing his country if the tribes knew they
could not run away to another country with impunity.
In answer to Ibn Sa‘ud’s question as to what would happen
supposing the King of ‘Iraq spread the news that tribes could
not be sent back and urged them therefore to go over to him, I
said that my knowledge of the ‘Iraq Government assured me that
such a suggestion was entirely unwarranted; indeed, the ‘Iraq
Government had declared that they were willing to undertake to dis
courage tribes from coming into their country. Ibn Sa'ud asked
what he should do if a tribe came over to him. I said that if a tribe
chose to come across that tribe could not be prevented from so
doing and asylum could not be refused. His Highness repeated
that he was perfectly convinced that unless the clause about the
restitution of tribes were embodied in the agreement it would be
worthless, and added that he could not subscribe to any agreement
which did not contain the provision he wanted. I replied that I was
sorry that His Highness should take up this attitude, and had I
been aware of it before I should certainly not have thought it worth
while coming all this way to discuss the question with him. The
‘Iraq Government would not agree to that principle; the British
Government were of opinion that ‘Iraq was right; and if the point
were pressed I must drop the whole question. I was not asking
His Highness to subscribe to any agreement which he considered to
be wrong in principle, and I could not see w r hy he should obstinately
maintain his attitude and refuse to consider anything that did not