ON SLAVE TRADE (EAST COAST OF AFRICA).
137
Saeed had taken Sohar, a demand was made by the same chief for its immediate cession
to him.
34. Incorporated with the Muscat State, and under its support, Sohâr may be able to
resist any such encroachments ; separated, therefore, it is certain to fall into the hands of
the Wahabees, or to become the focus of revolutionary movements throughout Oman.
I trust, therefore, that the Government will deem it right to disallow the pretensions
lately set up in behalf of the independency of Syud Toorkee, and by countenancing the
just claims of Syud Thoweynee to the sovereignty over the district of Sohâr, strengthen
the latter in securing it from foreign occupation, and in preventing the other evils which
its alienation from the Muscat State would inevitably engender.
35. Reverting to the dispute pending between Syud Thoweynee and Syud Majeed,
I proceed in the next place to examine into the agreement made between the two parties»
whereby the latter engaged to pay to the former the sum of 40,000 dollars per annum.
36. Colonel Rigby’s account of this transaction is as follows : * I am informed that
‘‘ soon after the death of the late Imam, Syud Thoweynee sent his cousin, by name
(( Mahomed bin Salem, from Muscat to Zanzibar to represent to Syud Majeed, that as the
“ revenues of Muscat are much less than those of Zanzibar, and as their father had been
" in the habit of assisting the Muscat treasury with remittances from Zanzibar, he hoped
“ his brother would likewise continue to afford him pecuniary aid. In consequence
Syud Majeed agreed to remit Syud Thoweynee the sum of 40,000 German crowns
annually, of which sum 10,000 crowns were for the payment to the Wahabees, 10,000
crowns to their mutual brother Syud Toorkee, who had been put in possession, by their
‘‘ father, of the territories of Sohâr, and the remaining 20,000 crowns were for Syud
“ Thoweynee himself ; but it was stipulated that the payment of the entire amount should
(( be conditional on Syud Thowenyee refraining from hostilities with his brother Syud
Toorkee ; and as Syud Thoweynee has broken this agreement, and undertaken hostilities
against Syud Toorkee, the money for the past year has not been remitted to Muscat.
“ After the return of Syud Mahomed bin Salem to Muscat, Syud Thoweynee agreed to
“ the arrangement made by him, and wrote to the Customs Master here to receive the
“ money and remit it to him. There appears to have been no formal written agreement
“ on the subject, as the payment was not to be considered as a tribute, or in any way as
“ acknowledging the dependency of Zanzibar upon the Sultans of Muscat ; but it was as
“ a free gift from one brother to the other, subject to the condition of his not doing any
“ injury to a third brother.”
37. In a subsequent Despatch (No. 46, of 1859) Colonel Rigby repeats verbatim the
foregoing statement, adding that his informant was Syud Majeed himself, who is conhrmed
by Syud Soliman, Syud Hilal, and all the principal Arabs.
38. Another repetition of the above occurs in Colonel Rigby’s letter (No. 116, of 1859)
with the following additional details ; “ On his leaving for Muscat, Mahomed bin Salem
“ was paid the first half-year’s allowance, viz. 20,000 crowns, of which 5,000 crowns were
‘‘ for Syud Toorkee, to enable him to pay the tribute due to the Wahabee Chief from the
Sohar State. Syud Thoweynee kept the whole of this money, and engaged in hostilities
against Syud Toorkee.”
39. In juxta-position to the above, I proceed to give Syud Thoweynee’s account of
the transaction. His statement is as follows : On the death of Syud Saeed, I sent Ma-“
homed Bin Salem and Mahomed Bin Saeed to Zanzibar, to make arrangements with
“ Syud Majeed for the division of our father’s property. When that was done, the
“ subject was discussed as to what position Zanzibar was to occupy hereafter ; my two
(( agents pointed out to Syud Majeed, that he could only hold it as tributary to Oman.
“ It was accordingly agreed that Majeed should remit 40,000 dollars annually, as tribute
“ to the Muscat treasury.” He denies in toio that any conditions whatever, such as are
stated by the opposite party were attached to this agreement, or that any division of the
sum stipulated for formed part of the compact. He meets the statement regarding the
portion which it is alleged that Syud Toorkee was to receive of the 40,000 crowns by
asking, “ Why, if it was intended ^ for Toorkee, was the amount to be paid to me ?
“ Was it an admission of his subjection to me ? If so,” he remarked, addressing the Rev.
Mr. Badger, “ please to note the concession. If not, why was it stipulated that the
money should be paid through me instead of being paid to Syud Toorkee direct?
“ My brother Majeed is not at a loss for means of sending money to Toorkee, as his
later gifts remitted to Sohâr abundantly prove. And as to the statement that the 5,000
crowns were for Toorkee, to enable him to pay the tribute to “ the Wahabee Chief
from the Sohâr State, it is notorious to every one that the tribute for Sohâr has always
(( been paid by Muscat, and is so paid still.”
40. In reply to the inquiry whether any written document existed relative to this transaction,
Syud Thoweynee could not speak with absolute certainty. He himself had not
seen it, though he has an impression that one exists, and that it may still be in the possession
of Mahomed bin Salem. The latter informed him of all that had passed at
Zanzibar on his return to Muscat, and as he (Thoweynee) had shortly after received a
part of the tribute, he considered that the affair had been finally settled, and that no
difficulty would arise in future respecting it. Mahomed bin Salem having long since
retired to Mecca, a reference to him on this subject was impracticable; but Syud
0.116 S Theweynee
Appendix, No. 8..
* Letter, No, 19, of
1859.
