مجموعة ٦/ ١٩ "الجزيرة العربية: (المملكة العربية السعودية) التقرير السنوي لمملكة الحجاز ونجد." [ظ‎‎٢‎٠‎٧] (٥٤٠/٤١٥)

16
W
expeditions from Hejaz-Nejd, which were headed off by the Transjordan
authorities before any raiding had occurred, and one affair which had formed the
subject of an obscure Hejazi note, but which proved to have been an internal raid
m the Hejaz anterior to and separate from a raid into Transjordan by the
well-known brigand, Nawwaj-al-Awaji.
30. Seven of the twelve raids just mentioned were laid to the charge of
Transjordan tribesmen. All but one occurred between the 3rd February and
the 3rd April. All were of little intrinsic importance. In five cases in which
specific damage was alleged by the Hejazi Government the total of loot and
casualties shown in their protests was 183 camels, 620 riyals, one rifle and some
clothing, one man killed and four wounded. An element of political importance
was introduced into another case in which the Hejazi Government, without
stating the amount of loot taken, accused Beni Sakhr tribesmen of a raid against
the Al-Fitna section of the Howeitat and a certain Khitam Ibn Jandal. The
matter was eventually left for discussion between Captain Glubb and Ibn Zeid,
but in the intervening correspondence both sides raised controversial issues of a
troublesome kind. The Transjordan authorities held that both parties were
Transjordan subjects, and that the raid was no concern of Ibn Baud’s, although
it had admittedly taken place in his territory. The Hejazi Government
countered by contesting the nationality of Al-Fitna. They also made explicit
accusations, which had to be rebutted, regarding Captain Glubb’s handling of
the matter. The seventh and only remaining case was one of rather later date,
which only came to the notice of the Legation in August, when the Transjordan
authorities spontaneously asked the Hejazi Government to produce the owners
of two camels and two rifles which had been recovered from a party of thieves.
31. It may be noted in passing that in several of the cases summarised in
the preceding paragraph the Transjordan authorities made a practice of asking
that Hejaz-Nejd complainants should be told to report to Captain Glubb. This
suggestion was obviously unwelcome to the Hejazi Government, who evaded it by
leaving the cases outstanding pending their discussion between Captain Glubb
and Ibn Zeid, except in one instance, in which they acquiesced to the extent of
undertaking to send a representative of the Governor of A1 Ula to take delivery
of loot awaiting restitution.
32. Five of the twelve raids recorded during the year were alleged to have
been committed by Hejaz-Nejd subjects. Two of these were insignificant. Three
others were more important, namely, an attack on a patrol of the Arab Legion on
the 30th March, in which three men of the legion were killed, one wounded and
the effects of all stolen; a raid on the 5th May, in which sixty camels were taken
and one man killed; and a raid on the 28th September, in which a party of
Transjordan tribesmen camping in Hejazi territory were robbed of nearly
200 camels. In the first case the Hejaz-Nejd Government showed some signs of
being impressed by the strong representations of the Legation, and eventually
returned three camels and three rifles. The second case was chiefly important
because the Hejazi Government denied the Transjordan nationality of the
victims, members of the Atun section of the Howeitat. The same question arose
in the third case. The Hejazi authorities returned thirty-five of the camels direct
to the Atun, but they claimed them as Hejazi subjects, and held, moreover, that
some of the camels were non-returnable as they were the proceeds of earlier raids
by the Atun themselves. The matter created a storm of indignation on the part
of the authorities in Transjordan, who saw in it not only a serious aggression
against tribes whom they were trying to restrain, but an attempt on the part of
Ibn Baud to capture the allegiance of the Atun, as well as to ignore the
MacDonnell finding, under which any loot taken before the 1st August, 1930, fell
to be regarded as having passed into the ownership of the actual holders at the
time of the investigation The affair, thus complicated, gave rise to an active
correspondence among the British authorities concerned. On the 25th December
His Majesty’s High Commissioner for Transjordan forwarded to the Legation,
and presumably to the Colonial Office, three reports from the British officers
responsible for the maintenance of order in Transjordan, in which they attacked
the conciliatory policy of His Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom with
hardly less vigour than they upbraided Ibn Baud. Up to the end of the year
His Majesty’s Government had taken no decision on the issues raised.
*
V