IOR/F/4/2614/164853

The item consists of copies and extracts of correspondence and resolutions cited in, or enclosed with, extracts of a Political Letter from the Government of Bombay to the East India Company Court of Directors, 28 August 1855. The enclosures are dated 22 September 1854-22 August 1855.

The item contains correspondence between: the Government of Bombay; the Court of Directors; Captain Arnold Burrowes Kemball, Resident in the Persian Gulf; Rear-Admiral Sir Henry John Leeke, Commander-in-Chief of the Indian Navy; and Lieutenant Alexander Foulerton, Senior Indian Naval Officer in the Persian Gulf and Commander of the Clive. They discuss measures for suppressing the 'slave trade' [trade in enslaved people] in the Gulf and the Red Sea regions, including the number, type, and availability of vessels required to intercept vessels involved in the trade. Leeke also makes the suggestion of using vessels currently stationed in the Gulf and at Aden.

Kemball mentions the difference in approaches for suppressing the trade between the governments on the Persian [Iranian] and the Arabian coasts of the Gulf. In particular, he mentions his conversations on this topic with Sheikh Sultan bin Sugger, Sheikh of Rasul Khymah and the Joasmees [Shaikh Sulṭān I bin Ṣaqr al-Qāsimī, Shaikh of Ra’s al-Khaymah and the Qawāsim], and Sheikh Abdullah bin Rashid, Sheikh of Amalgawein [Shaikh ‘Abdullāh bin Rāshid al-Mu‘allā, Shaikh of Umm al-Qaywayn]. He also makes note of the efforts of Meerza Mahmood Khan [Mīrzā Maḥmūd Khān], Persian Commissioner, to extend the relevant convention existing between Persia [Iran] and Great Britain. Additionally, he includes copy of a letter from Foulerton, which reports the status of six enslaved people who were recently manumitted at Bassidore [Basaʻidu].

The title page of the item contains the following references: 'Bombay Political Department', Draft Number '1199 [18]55', 'Collection No.5', 'Vol: 2', and 'Examiner's Office'. Originally, the Collection number was given as 'Collection No. 5 of No. 86 of 1855.' but 'of No. 86 of 1855.' has been crossed out.