Report from the Select Committee on Slave Trade (East Coast of Africa); together with the proceedings of the Committee, minutes of evidence, appendix and index

Bibliographic data

Monograph

Identifikator:: 832922498

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-79587

Document type:: Monograph

Title:: Report from the Select Committee on Slave Trade (East Coast of Africa); together with the proceedings of the Committee, minutes of evidence, appendix and index

Place of publication:: [London]

Publisher:: [The House of Commons]

Year of publication:: 1871

Scope:: 1 Online-Ressource (XXIV, 242 S.)

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

156 APPENDIX TO REPORT FROM SELECT COMMITTEE Appendix, No, 8. Zanzibar, desiring him to pay to bearer the balance of the Musaadeh ; ” that is, tlie aid or subsidy granted by Syud Majeed to his brother Thoweynee. The other contains the original order drawn up in Syud Majeed’s own writing, authorising the said Luddah to pay his brother d'howeynee every year ‘‘ a subsidy” of 40,000 crowns. 12. All the arguments adduced or adducible in favour of Syud Majeed’s claims are, I believe, fully and fairly stated in the foregoing summary. They are based on the follow ing grounds, viz. :— 1. The will, or rather wishes, of his late Highness Syud Saeed. 2. His recognition by foreign powers. 3. His virtual recognition by his rival brother Syud Thoweynee of Muscat. 4. His election as their Sovereign by the chiefs of Zanzibar and its African dependencies. I shall now proceed to make a few remarks under these several heads. 13. Although the tenor of the late Syud Saeed’s official communication to Lord Aberdeen, in 1844, is not absolutely conclusive that he contemplated dividing his empire by constituting Zanzibar and its African dependencies a separate kingdom under the sovereignty of his second son Khaled ; and although there is still less certain ground for inferring that, on the death of Khaled, he purposed carrying out the same Intention in ^ behalf of his fourth son Majeed ; nevertheless, I am of opinion that the evidence on that PwaerapV? outweighs the argument on the other,* that his late Highness, in his arrangements actually made, or prospectively designed, had nothing more in view than to allot subor dinate governorships to one or more of his'sons under the paramount Sovereio-n of Oman. f Colonel Rigby’s letter, No. 46 of 1859. $ Appendix B, reply to Query 7. § Appendix B, reply to Query 11. 14. Thus much conceded however, the question arises whether the late Syud Saeed, in conformity with pre-existing usage, possessed the right of dividing his dominions, or of disposing of them at will. Syud Majeed, during one of the Rev. Mr. Badger’s official interviews with him, attempted at first to maintain that he had; but on being requested to adduce one single corroborative instance in the past history of the rulers of Oman, or to explain how it fell out, if such was the recognised law on the subject, that the succession m the existing dynasty had so often been diverted from the direct line, and the supreme power successfully usurped, his Higliness at once abandoned the argument as untenable admitting that the sovereignty of Oman had hitherto depended on election, the princinal tribes generally choosing the candidate who was either most beloved by them or who possessed the greatest power to enforce his pretensions. His Highness's testimony in this respect IS m exact accordance with the account given by Syud Hilal, as reported by Colonel Rigby, of the mode of succession to the sovereignty of Oman; “ Mio-ht, coupled with election by the tribes, is the only right.” And again, The one who had most influence with the tribes was elected.”! 15. Colonel Rigby seemingly admits the same; for in explaining his former use of the word “ election,” as applied to the succession of the late Syud Saeed, he says, “ By the term ‘ election,’ I mean that he was proclaimed and accepted as their ruler by the Arabs of ^ Oman, to the exclusion of his elder brother.” And further on,—" The late Imam evidently considered that he possessed the right to dispose of his dominions as he pleased, from having, during his lifetime, disinherited his eldest son Hilal. But if the successor thus nominated were not acceptable to the people, I think they would refuse to accept him. ! And again,—" I think, if a ruler of Oman were to appoint as his successor a person who was not acceptable to the Arab tribes and chiefs, that they would refuse to acknowledge him, and elect as their ruler a person who was more popular with them.§ 16. Tlmsr. admissions, however, are somewhat qualified by two or three examples adduced by the way in support of the opposite view. First, the case of Syud Hilal, just mentioned ; but that instance proves nothing, even supposing that his being dis- inlierited implied his exclusion from the succession, since, if the succession was ultimately by election, his father at best could only have nominated him to the sovereio’nty, and his confirmation in that dignity would have depended on the temper of the tribes. of Ahmed bin Saeed, grandfather of the late Syud Saeed, and the ist of the reigning dynasty, who, according to Colonel Rigby, "divided his dominions during his own life, having appointed his son Kees to be chief of Sohar and ij Appendix B, reply his seventh and youngest son to be chief of Suik.”[| Although it is true that in after to Query 7. years, owing to the incessant strugles for the sovereignty, and the fierce strife of parties in Oman, the two small provinces above-named did eventually attain a nominal inde pendence, nevertheless it is highly improbable, from the peculiar circumstances of his own accession to the supreme power, that Ahmed’s original concession either contemplated or sanctioned their detatchment from the paramount state. They were most probably granted as appanages, but held on feudal tenure, their " syuds,” or lords, being bound to render military aid to the suzerain whenever called upon to do so. 1 In another place, replying to a query whether the tribes of Oman, to whom the late hyud Saeed owed his election to the sovereignty, and who had co-operated with him in the extension and consolidation of the African dependencies of the kingdom, might not justly claim a voice in the disposal of those territories. Colonel Rigby writes,—" The late Imaum

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Report from the Select Committee on Slave Trade (East Coast of Africa); together with the proceedings of the Committee, minutes of evidence, appendix and index

Monograph

Table of contents

Download

Monograph

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation