ملف ١٩١٦/١٣٢٣ الجزء ١ "بلوشستان: الأوضاع المضطربة على الحدود الأنجلو فارسية. الإدارة المستقبلية لولايات مكران وسرهد وقلات" [و‎‎٣‎٠‎٨] (٨٩٦/٦١٣)

CONFIDENTIAL.
No. 344, dated Sibi, the 30th Janaary (received let Febraary) 1923.
Fiom Tho Hon ble JVTr.. AV. Johnstov
General and Chief CommissioneJ £ BaludrLan Ag ' e “ t0 ^ Governor
To— Denys Buay, Esq., C.S.I., C.I E P B F f^- o ’ ,
ment of India in the Foreign and Politioal^epartmenl ^ G0TCrn '
Subject. Kalat Administration.
When I visited Simla last October it formed the matte,. „F m • ,
S S adm^Ln ^dtttitatio^ 1“!? i t° dUCed ^ ^‘
Agent, had had opportunity to enquire into the matter and report Onnorhf
mty was taken at the same time to discuss the future ndmimsfr!?- t a? P ,
o onel Keyes has now submitted in his letter No. 1-Q. of the 7th Janinrv
a very ful and accurate report accompanied by studied reasons f“ ? I
recommendations which he makes. As the whole subject of Makrau is so
bound up with the history and relations of the Kalat State he has I think
properly included the whole m one letter. Colonel Keyes has given studied
reasons for the recommendations he makes and as these were fully discussed
between us before his letter was completed and have my cordial Inurovaf T
need do little more than outline the matters with which his correspondence
deals and present m a concise form the points on which the orders or approval
or the Government of India are solicited. j t
2. It may be more convenient to deal first with the
changes in the Kalat administration and constitution.
question of radical
,, The rn^t recent orders cn the subject of the system of administration ol
1 e< i“ tal " c,(1 in Sir Jolln Ba msay’s letters No. 578-C. of the
30th August 1912 and Nos. 496-C. and 497-C. of the 8th July 1913. To the
first letter, which was mainly a declaration of policy which Sir John Bamsav
hoped to initiate, no reply was sent, but in his second letter he stated that he
understood that the views in his first letter had the tacit approyal of the
Government of India, an assumption that was not contradicted in the letter
from Government of India in the Foreign Department, No. 1S55-E Jj of the
18th August 1913 approving of the action taken and the policy indicated in
Wt'er^Te? 0 ! t 96 ^ nd 4|97 ' G - ? may,(therefore, be assumed that these three
letters of Sir John Ramsay contain the latest views approved by the Govern
ment of India on this subject. ^
f' Col ° uel Ke yes mentions in paragraph 15 of his letter certain changes
which would appear to have taken place:— 5
{a) The State Council -—
ThisCouncii was specially mentioned at the end of paragraph 1 of
Sir John Ramsay’s letter No. 497-C. and may be taken to have been
created with the approval of the Government of India, As, however, for the
reasons given m paragraph 16 of Colonel Keyes’ letter it never came into
exis ence, its recreation might be described as an innovation. The exis
tence oi such a. Council, of which the Khan should be President and the
Wazir-i-Azam Vice-President and on which the four leading Sardars would
ave permanent seats while other Sardars might be added by the Khan at will
and which would meet when summoned to deal with such matters as
might be referred to it by the Khan or the Political Agent, cannot be other
tnan a potential advantage. It is difficult to see how any possible adminis-
j ative disadvantage could accrue while it is possible to conceive of