"ملفات 61/12 و 61/16 (D 80) معاهدة بين بان سعود والحكومة البريطانية" [و‎‎١‎٤‎٠] (٤٠٨/٢٨٦)

Xbn Uud LeiDg inforaod tiat iii« Majesty's (JoveriMant
tiiiiie taoy OLviouulycould not iatsrfors io ralL^ous
■altera or in tiie oeeisions of Um rsli^ious courts,
vould ua« uieir ^ood offices, in territoriee under
iiritisn conuol or territories in which iila ^ajeety's
Qorernaent occupied a apeci&l position, to assist in
otitaining, the execution of any decision which algjbt be
e^iven in ta® coaipetent court s
t tiiou^iit tliat in view oi trie delicacy
01 the subject the (ioTiernaient of India aiit.nt be
unwilling to agree to any under taking being giren. he
was doubtful how far if at all it cs *ie within the
coaipetance of tne uovernamnt of India to give effect to
the deoiaioBs of the . Imria Courts. He agreed that the
points siiould oe put to tns». It would also nave to be
ju ^ oo j ■:> , i-iao, r de itine, irrifis-'vordan and possibly
other countries.
iiriiaa hailijf.
i VU said tti&t Ibn w »aud had pointed out
thai he was not a party to the Treat/ of Lausanne and
did not accept the declaration aiade by J.houpard at the
Uuaanoe conference in regard to the hejaz Hail way. 11®
S.iad, iio 'ever # niv not wish to raise tne question of
DriiiGiple at the sio^ent« The iai.nediate rfuestion w s thai
the railway should be put in order for use nurin t3 the
fortiicomiog pilgrimage. Ibn Baud wished to obtain for
this purpose r^ii adwanee froa? the ^urnlue br lance?, of the
8e«tions of the railway operating outside the Hejas. He
had alleged that tne Adninistration of the yriar section
of