§ LORD LAMINGTON rose to ask His Majesty's Government whether the arrangement made with the Sultan of Muscat for the prevention of gun-running is working satisfactorily and whether the French Government are co-operating in the matter.
150§ The noble Lord said: This Question deals with a matter which I think has been a considerable source of anxiety to His Majesty's Government here and to the Government of India—the vexed question of the running of arms into Persia as well as into Afghanistan. Considerable sums of money have been expended by the two Governments and lives have been sacrificed in trying to put clown this very harmful traffic, and I understand that in the spring of this year certain negotiations were successfully carried out with the Sultan of Muscat by which all arms imported into Muscat should be bonded and only allowed to be taken out when their destination was one to which they could properly be sent. It would be interesting to know how far these negotiations have been carried out, and whether any success has been attendant upon them. We are also aware that for many years past the French Government, by virtue of a very old Treaty with Muscat, have not perhaps given us all the assistance that might have been desirable in putting down this traffic, but I hope now that the Entente is so closely established they are giving assistance in this matter. I believe that from time to time proposals have been put before them by way of compensation for the abrogation of this Treaty, but they have always been fruitless. I do not know whether it has ever occurred to His Majesty's Government that this is a subject which might be very properly put to arbitration if the French Government are still unwilling to give their best assistance in putting down this traffic. I will not say more now, but I shall be glad to get some assurance from His Majesty's Government that success is attending their efforts by virtue of the understanding with the Sultan of Muscat to relieve our Navy from the arduous work of trying to suppress this traffic.
§ VISCOUNT MORLEYI am quite sensible of the discretion used by the noble Lord in putting this Question, and here again I must repeat that the moment is not opportune for anything like a full or complete discussion of the matter. The arrangement made with the Sultan of Muscat by which arms were bonded, though by no means ideal, has worked as satisfactorily as a limited arrangement of that kind could work. My noble friend referred to the attitude of the French Government. The French Government have their own difficulties. We are perfectly 151 sensible of them. But we are glad to think and hope that the French Government, which cannot have two minds as to the demands of civilisation in this case, are doing the best they can to meet us in the matter. The adverse contention held by the French Government to the arrangement we made with the Sultan is that these arms are not merely bonded but sequestrated, if not really indeed confiscated. In our view that is not the case, and we shall continue to use every effort with the French Government to bring them actively and fully into line with us on this particular matter.
§ LORD LAMINGTONDoes the noble Viscount mean to say that the arms which are bonded are considered by the French Government to be confiscated?
§ VISCOUNT MORLEYThe arms are undoubtedly bonded, and one contention of an important interest in France is that what we call "bonded" is in truth confiscation. That is, as we contend, an erroneous view. But be that as it may, I fall back upon my original remark that the relations between ourselves and the French Government upon the Muscat question are such that the present moment is particularly inopportune for a discussion of the case in Parliament.