File 87/1926 Pt 2 'Arabia: Bin Saud: Relations with H.M.G. Revision of Treaty.' [‎290r] (267/840)

Minute Paper.
Department.
t u)
/
345a. 5000 1/25
course, and I agree that it would g».ftggT«ft»r to
/n
'prescrihe certain proofs in provisoes to the Article.
The present provisoes in the Article are
also one-sided; Nejdi and Hejazi subjects have only
to possess papers; British subjects have also to
be registered.
It seems desirable to discover what the C. 0 .
mean by registration. There is first of all the
registration of British subjects resident in foreign
countries under Chapter XXVII of the General Cosnular
Instructions; such registration at British
consulates is compulsory by 0. in C. under the
Foreign Jurisdiction Act in certain extra-territorial
countries - see paper flagged ’A*; these countries
include Turkey; is it intended that the Hejaz and
Uejd should be added to the list? In the second
place there is, of course, the more Important question
of British pilgrims. The C.0. are perhaps thinking
of the registration of such pilgrims by means of
lists transmitted to the Consul at Jeddah by the
authorities in their countries of origin, or by other
means. Probably there would be no objection to the
proposal that such registration should be part of the
proof required of British nationality in the case of a
pilgrim. Probably also there would be little objection
to the proposal that documentary proof in the
pilgrim* s own possession should also be required. But
both on the question of registration and of
documentary proof it seems desirable, to consult the
Government of India further before concurring in the
Article.
A minor question i]6 the nature of the documentary
proof to be required. Pilgrims could hardly be
required mk