File 57/1928 Pt 4 'Iraq-Nejd Relations: Mission of Sir G. Clayton to Ibn Saud.' [‎326v] (650/1364)

of force for the expulsion of non-criminals was specifically forbidden.
The Najd delegates for some time appeared unable to understand
this point. They continued to reiterate that they desired the extra
dition of tribes crossing the frontier without having committed a
crime, but denied that any modification of the Bahra Agreement
was necessary. On the whole it appeared that they had not
prepared themselves on this subject and were not in agreement with
one another. The point was eventually postponed to a subsequent
meeting. With regard to the case of a Najdi who committed a crime
in ‘Iraq and then took refuge in ‘Iraq to escape punishment by the
Najd Government (or vice versa), it was agreed that an undertaking
to surrender such an individual should apply to tribesmen only.
Najdi subjects who committed offences in the towns of ‘Iraq would
be subject to the ‘Iraq penal code in the usual manner.
2. Mr. Cornwallis then said that he desired to draw the attention
of the Najd delegates to a point which he considered to be of supreme
importance, and that was that, at the present moment, there were
several tribes whose nationality was in dispute. The Dahamsha,
for example, were a case in point. His Majesty’s Government and
the ‘Iraq Government stated that they were ‘Iraqis and the fact was
mentioned in the Muhammara Convention. The King, however,
claimed them as Najdis. Until such a point as this was decided,
any extradition agreement would be of no value. Dr. Damluji
replied that while it was true that the Muhammara Convention
stated that the Amarat were ‘Iraqis, the Uqair Protocol said that
tribes who at the time were subject to neither Government
could subsequently join whichever Government they desired.
Mr. Cornwallis refused to admit that the Protocol covered the case of
the Dahamsha. Shaikh Fuad Hamza stated that the minutes of the
meetings at Uqair proved that the Protocol in question was framed
specifically for the case of the Dahamsha. A lengthy debate ensued
without producing any agreement. The Najd delegates claimed
that the ‘Iraq Government had tacitly admitted that the Dahamsha
were Najdis until a year ago when, during the course of the Muhhamad
al-Turki incident, they suddenly claimed them as ‘Iraqis. In reply
to this statement, the ‘Iraq delegates produced a telegram from the
High Commissioner for ‘Iraq to King Ibn Sa'ud, dated September,
1923,* claiming the Dahamsha as ‘Iraqi subjects.
3. Mr. Cornwallis finally said that he only brought forward the
Dahamsha case as an example of the difficulties to be encountered.
The Shammar refugees were another case in point. He said
that the Shammar refugees had now automatically become ‘Iraqi
subjects. This statement was greeted with loud protests by the Najd
delegates, who pointed out that Section 1 of the Muhammara
Convention declared that the Najd Shammar were Najdis. A
prolonged discussion ensued introducing the Sevres and Lausanne
46426/23 ; not printed.