§ SIR E. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTI beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether it is a fact, as reported by telegrams of the 21st February, that the Sultan of Oman has withdrawn his concession of a coaling 294 station to the French, under the threat of bombardment from Her Majesty's men-of-war; and that the Sultan has issued a proclamation to this effect?
§ MR. BRODRICKThe lease which the Sultan proposed to give was contrary to treaty, and has not been proceeded with. For further details we must wait till dispatches reach us.
§ MR. LABOUCHERE (Northampton)I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether it is a fact that the Seyd of Oman has revoked the grant that he proposed to make to France, under a threat from the British Admiral on the station of a bombardment of the forts of his capital: what was the nature of the contemplated grant; whether the French Government had been previously notified of the intended action of the Admiral; whether there is any treaty between this country and the Government of Oman by which the latter pledged itself not to alienate territory, or to grant a lease of territory to any Foreign Power without the previous permission of Her Majesty's Government; whether the relations of this country and of France towards Muscat are based upon the Treaty concluded between Great Britain and France in 1862, by which both countries reciprocally engaged to respect the independence of the Sovereigns of Muscat; and whether Her Majesty's Government claims any special right to control the exercise of full sovereignty by the Seyd of Oman within his kingdom, which is not possessed by any other European Great Power?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA(1) In answer to the first question, I reply that the grant which the Sultan proposed to make was contrary to treaty, and has not been proceeded with. Only brief telegraphic reports have been received, and the dispatches on their way must be awaited before I can give further details; (2) the grant referred to is understood to have been a lease to the French Government of Bunder Jisseh as a coaling station; (3) it was a question between the Government of India and the Sultan of Muscat, not between the Government of India and any other Power. It should be added that no hint was given to the Government of India of the transactions that were being com- 295 pleted at Muscat; (4) the Sultan is under a special obligation to the British Government in respect to the alienation or assignment of any part of his territories; (5) the answer to the last question but one is in the affirmative; (6) the Sultan of Oman has for years been in receipt of a subsidy from the Indian Government, and has on various occasions received the help and advice of that Government in maintaining his authority and quieting disturbances in his territory. The relations existing between him and the British Government are special, though they do not necessarily interfere with the exercise of any sovereign rights he may possess.
§ MR. LABOUCHEREWill the noble Lord say whether this obligation not to alienate territory is by treaty?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIAThe arrangement alluded to between the Indian Government and the Sultan of Muscat was arrived at some time back.
§ MR. WARNER (Stafford, Lichfield)Can the noble Lord say whether there is any record kept of this arrangement?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIAYes, there is a record.
MR. GIBSON BOWLES (Lynn Regis)May I ask whether the naval demonstration was made by order of the Indian Government?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIAHer Majesty's Government and the Government of India have been in constant communication, but there is not complete telegraphic communication between Bombay and Muscat.