157
ON SLAVE TRADE (EAST COAST OF AFRICA).
Imauni succeeded in establishing Ids power over the East Coast of Africa chiefly through
the mutual jealousies and dissensions of the petty chiefs, who frequently sent envoys to
Muscat to solicit his interference. I do not think that it would ever occur to any Arabs
in Oman that they had any voice in the succession to the government of the African
possessions on the ground supposed. I think they were regarded as being at the absolute
disposal of the I maura ; and the fact that all the property of the State, such as ships ot
war, arms, &c., were considered as the private estate of the Imaum, strengthens this
opinion.”*
19. To this I reply that the mutual jealousies of the native petty chiefs were undoubtedly
availed of by the late Syud Saeed to extend his conquests in Eastern Africa ;
but it is equally certain that he acquired the sovereignty over Zanzibar, Peraba, and
Mombasa, as also over several other localities on the African continent, in virtue oí his
havino- been elected to succeed his father Syud Sultan, who had conquered them from the
Portuguese. Hence, as the suffrages of the tribes of Oman contributed to invest the late
Syud %aeed with supreme authority over those dependencies, it is but reasonable to suppose
that the tribes at the present day claim the same privilege still. And further, as
Syud Sultan does not appear to have arrogated to himself the right to dispose of the
forelo-n possessions of the kingdom, there is no valid ground for presuming that his son
could leo-itlmately exercise that prerogative. Moreover, the argument drawn from a
comparison of the sovereign’s right to dispose of the sovereignty, because the property of
the State was considered to form part of his private estate, is fallacious. The sover^nty,
as we have seen, depended on election, and, strictly speaking, the State property of Oman,
was confined almost exclusively to the fortresses of the kingdom, which a successor
o-enerally inherited, though not unfrequelitly obliged to coerce some of the garrisons to
recoo-nise Ids supremacy. All other movable and immovable property, including what he
orio-inally possessed, as well' as what he had added thereto during his reign from the
public revenues, were held as belonging to the private estate of his predecessor. Such,
undoubtedly is, and ever has been, the law of inheritance in the succession among the
Imams and kind's of Oman, and it serves to explain what otherwise seems most anomalous
in the will of the late Sultan Syud Saeed. By that instrument the testator directs that,
after the payment of certain legacies, all his p^perty, including his ships of war (two
only exce%1, which are bequeathed to the "Treasury of the Mussulmans that is to
the State), his money, palaces, furniture, plantations, &c.,_ shall be divided among ns
sundvum/cMldren "acœrdn^ as Cbxl has m-damed m II^ kw;' t butrm pmvnnmi
whatever is made for the succession, and no bequests devised from any propeijty which,
acrreeably with pre-existing usage, was considered tobe public,and therefore as belonging
of rio-ht to his successor in the sovereignty. It was in accordance with this law that his
Hio-hness Syud Maieed (who nevertheless claims the sovereignty of the Zanzibar territories
ancf all the rights appertaining thereto) only sirred equally with his brothers in the
inheritance left by their father. Thus Colonel Eigby says, “ Ihe ships of war, guns,
stores of every description, even the arms in the possession or the troops, were set
down at a valuation, and charged against the new ruler as a debt due to Ins father s
estate.” f
20. The only logical inference deducible from the foregoing considerations is in strict
accordance with the conclusion arrived at by the Reverend Mr. Badger after a careful
inquiry into the laws which have regulated the succession among the Imaums and Kings
of Oman for several centuries. He writes—" Among all the sovereigns * # *
not one occurs who is recorded to have assumed or exercised the right of nominating a
successor, or of disposing of his territories by will or otherwise. On the death of a ruler,
the member of his family who happened to exercise the greatest influence at the time,
either put himself forward, or was put forward by the people, to succeed to the sovereignty.
The claim was frequently disputed by other of the relations of the deceased, and intestine
family wars followed, the strongest ultimately gaining the ascendancy ; but even in such
cases the rio-ht to the sovereignty does not appear to have been regarded as valid without
the concurrence of the principal tribes. §
21. Havino- thus, as I conceive, fairly answered all arguments adduced in support of
the contrary view, and proved, as well by the admission of His Highness Syud Majeed and
of Colonel Ricrby as by historical evidence, that the sovereigns of Oman did not, in
accordance with pre-established law or usage, posssess the right of disposing of tlmir
dominions, it results that the claims of Syud Majeed to the sovereignty of the Zanzibar
territories, as in any degree founded on the will or wishes of the late Syud Saeed, aie
invalid and nugatory.
22 I proceed, in the next place, to consider the argument adduced by Syud Majeed in
behalf of his claims to the sovereignty, on the ground of his having been recognised as the
ruler of Zanzibar and its African dependencies by several of the foreign poweis which
had previously been in alliance with his predecessor and father, the late Syud Saeed. It
is unnecessary, however, to enlarge on that point, which has already been sumciently
discussed in paragraph 9 of this Report ; for even admitting that the alleged recognition
has actually been tendered by France and the United States of America, and subsequently
by the Hanseatic Republic, || after a full investigation into the merits of the dispute reo-ardino-
the sovereignty still pending between Syud Majeed and Syud Thoweynee (which,
at b^st’ is very doubtful), the fact that the two brothers have voluntarily referred the settle-0JA6.
^3 ment
Appendix, No. 8.
* Appendix B, reply
to Query 23.
t Muscat Report,
Appendix C.
J Appendix K, paragraph
11.
§ Muscat Report,
Appendix B,
paragraph 1.
¡I Appendix B,
replies to Queries
13 and 21,
