"ملف A/5 مصائد اللؤلؤ بالخليج العربي" [ظ‎‎١‎٠] (٦٢/٢٠)

A collection of confidential correspondence* respecting the Ceylon
* Not Drinted P earl fislieries » which took P lace
p in 1891-92, and copies of the
argument and counter case of Her late Majesty's Government in the
Eehring Sea Arbitration (certain passages in which are specially marked),
are enclosed herewith for Mr. Brodrick's information. They may perhaps
be found useful in the preparation of the case.
I am, &c.,
The Under Secretary of State E. G okst.
for India.
Enclosure No. 3
India Office to Eoreign Office.
India Office,
Sir, 10th August 1904.
I am directed by Mr. Secretary Brodrick to acknowledge the
receipt of Sir E. Gorst's letter of the 16th ultimo, informing him that
the Marquess of Lansdowne concurs in the proposal to refer to the Law
Officers of the Crown the question of the steps to be taken to prevent
foreign interference with the rights enjoyed by the tribes on the
Arabian coast of the Persian Gulf in the pearl fisheries.
Mr. Brodrick is of opinion that, should Lord Lansdowne see no
objection, the case to be laid before the Law Officers, which involves
considerations of international law, might more conveniently be stated
by your Department; but I am to enclose a copy of a Memorandum
stating the material facts.
Should Lord Lansdowne concur in the proposed course, Mr. Brodrick
will be glad to see a draft of the case before it is actually laid before
the Law Officers.
I have, &c.,
The Under Secretary of State, A. G odley.
Eoreign Office.
Annex.
• • • •
Pearl Eisheries in the Persian Gulf.
Memorandum.
The Government of India have called the attention of His Majesty's
Government in the annexed letter to the fact that by the steps they
have consistently taken for more than a century to maintain the
maritime peace of the Persian Gulf, they have deprived the Arab Chiefs
on the coast of the means of forcibly protecting their interests in the
pearl fisheries, and that they therefore feel themselves to be under an
obligation to defend those rights in so far as they can reasonably be
substantiated.
They cite instances in the past in which they have have successfully
intervened to prevent the intrusion both of foreigners, by diplomatic
means, and of British subjects.
They recognise, however, that the position is difficult, both in regard
to British subjects and from the point of view of international law.
They therefore desire to ascertain the extent to which they may be
authorised to intervene, should the necessity arise.