In the 19th century, the ruler of Abu Dhabi had significant wealth and power in the Persian Gulf.  It was also a precarious position.  Multiple holders of the title (referred to as the ‘Chief of Abu Dhabi’ in contemporary records) died violently.  The India Office Records tell the story of one such death - the 1845 assassination of Shaikh Khalīfah bin Shakhbūṭ Āl Nahyān, by his own relatives.

Map of Arabia and Syria - 'The Map which Lady Anne Blunt took to Nejd', 1878-1879. Shelfmark: Add.54083 Images Online

A detailed account of the assassination can be found in a letter from Mullā Ḥusayn, Agent at Sharjah , to Major Samuel Hennell the Resident in the Persian Gulf.  Ḥusayn provides some background to the assassination: Shaikh Khalīfah’s brother had tried to convince him of the danger posed by their relatives, specifically their nephew, ‘Īsá bin Khālid al-Falāḥī. Khalīfah was unconvinced by this, and refused his brother’s suggestion to banish ‘Īsá from Abu Dhabi.  Khalīfah attempted to win his relatives over by treating them ‘with great favour and kindness’.

The plan backfired spectacularly as the assassination happened during a meal by the beach in July 1845.  Ḥusayn paints a picture of a relaxing day, with ‘conversation on indifferent and frivolous subjects’, taking place while ‘the usual eatables’ were enjoyed in the shade.  As Khalīfah’s brother walked towards the beach, the assassins, under orders from ‘Īsá, ‘suddenly drew their daggers and struck him’.  Khalīfah drew his sword to defend his brother, but the assassins turned on him.  As the brothers lay dying, the assassins ‘seized the fort, then entered the houses of the Sheikhs, [and] ejected their women and children’.  ‘Īsá then secretly wrote and sent a letter in the name of Shaikh Khalīfah and his brother, requesting that members of their tribe bring horses and camels to Abu Dhabi, presumably with the intention of capturing and using them himself.  Ḥusayn’s comment that this caused ‘great consternation’ in the surrounding area may, perhaps, seem a bit of an understatement.

After receiving Husayn’s letter, British authorities displayed a surprising calm.  They acknowledged that the assassination had been ‘atrocious’, and they especially lamented the loss of a Shaikh they had been working with efficiently.  ‘The demise of Shaikh Khalīfah is much regretted,’ wrote Hennell , ‘[because] he thoroughly understood and appreciated the power of the British Government’.  Hennell explained the strategic advantages that Britain had achieved by co-operating with Khalīfah , demonstrating that relations had been effective and mutually beneficial.  However, British officials wrote that they did ‘not anticipate that this event [would] disturb the tranquillity of the Gulf’.  To them, this unhappy event was a local matter that would not have monumental wider impact on the region.

The aftermath of the assassination saw further politically motivated murders, with multiple relatives of Shaikh Khalīfah being assassinated as they vied for control of Abu Dhabi.  The series of murders demonstrated that, in this region at the time, power went hand-in-hand with danger.

Miriam Gibson
Content Specialist Archivist, British Library/Qatar Foundation Partnership

Further Reading:
Details regarding the assassination, its reporting to the British, and reactions to it – British Library IOR/P/931/32 ff 235-244.
More information about the assassination can be found in:
J G Lorimer, Gazetteer of the Persian Gulf Vol I. Historical. Part IA & IB (1915).
Frauke Heard-Bey, From Trucial States to United Arab Emirates : a society in transition (2005)

 

The India Office regularly received requests for help from people stranded in the UK, and often in difficult financial situations, who wished to travel to India, either because it was their home or because they had family living there.  The usual response from the India Office was to decline to help, and examples of such cases have featured on previous Untold Lives blog posts.  However, very occasionally a case arose where government help was given to an individual.

The Strangers’ Home, West India Dock Road, Limehouse from Illustrated London News 28 February 1857 p.194 British Library Images Online

On 14 July 1869, Colonel Hughes, Secretary of The Strangers' Home for Asiatics located in Limehouse in London, wrote to the India Office regarding a man named C W O’Donoghue.  Colonel Hughes described O’Donoghue as ‘country born and native of Calcutta’ who had been admitted into the Home in a state of destitution one week previously.  He had been engaged as compounder and interpreter on the ship Ganges taking Indian emigrants from Calcutta to Demerara in British Guiana -a compounder made up medicines for the ship’s surgeon.  Under his agreement of employment for the voyage, O’Donoghue had requested a return passage not to India but to England, presumably as he expected to find new employment in the UK.  Unfortunately, when in London he failed to find the employment he expected.  With his funds running out, he applied to the Colonial Office, then the India Office, and was referred to the Strangers' Home.  By good fortune, the ship Newcastle was due to leave London for Calcutta with several ‘natives of India’ on board.  Colonel Hughes asked if the Secretary of State for India would consider approving the payment of £20 for O’Donoghue’s ticket, otherwise he feared that ‘his remaining in England will result in destitution and loss of character’.

Sailing ship Newcastle built in 1857 and wrecked in Torres Strait in 1883. Photograph held by John Oxley Library, State Library of Queensland, and published on Wikimedia Commons.

Colonel Hughes visited the India Office to talk to M E Grant Duff, Under Secretary of State for India, about the case.  Following the meeting, Grant Duff put a note in a Public & Judicial Department file in which he pointed out that the Government of India should be told to grant return passages to Indian ports only, presumably to prevent similar cases from occurring.  He also wrote: ‘I hardly know whether the application should be complied with, but as the cost will only be £20, it will probably be the cheapest way of getting rid of the man’.  The Secretary of State evidently agreed, as a letter was duly sent to Colonel Hughes consenting to this plan.  On 20 July, Colonel Hughes wrote again to the India Office to confirm that passage had been secured for O’Donoghue on the Newcastle which had left the dock that morning.  He enclosed a receipt for the cost of the ticket, and a certificate of his being on board the ship signed by L J Bateman, the Chief Mate.

John O’Brien
India Office Records

Further Reading:
Case of C W O’Donoghue asking for passage from London to Calcutta, July 1869, reference IOR/L/PJ/2/49 File 7/305.
Bengal Public Letter, No.4 of 1869, regarding the agreement of Compounder & Interpreter, plus four Topazes, engaged to proceed with Indian emigrants to Demerara on board the ship Ganges, 16 January 1869, reference IOR/L/PJ/3/67 p.17.

 

A recent donation to India Office Private Papers is a letter sent in 1796 from Joseph Fowke to his friend Sir Robert Chambers, Chief Justice of Calcutta.  Joseph Fowke was born in Madras in 1716, the son of an East India Company civil servant.  He too served the Company in Madras before becoming a free merchant in India, dealing in diamonds.  Fowke had three sons and three daughters by his two wives, and one illegitimate daughter.  He left India for the last time in 1788, returning to England on board the Princess Royal.

Calcutta Gazette 26 July 1787 British Newspaper Archive

In July 1796 Joseph Fowke believed he was about to die. He wrote to Sir Robert to say farewell.

Joseph Fowke to Sir Robert Chambers, Chief Justice of Calcutta, 8 July 1796 Mss Eur F779

This is the text of his letter -

'Dear Sir Robert
In running over the List of all my old friends and acquaintance I find you among the number I have to take leave off. I send you these my last good wishes for your health and prosperity, and that you may speedily join all your amiable family here and unite them in a firm band to be a mutual happiness to each other to the end of their lives. Having not the smallest hope of my recovery It is a comfort to me to reflect that I have not a single soul of my family left in India, and I heartily wish that none of them may ever find their way thither again. I know of nothing gained by these emigrations, but corrupt morals, a numerous black offspring to discolour our home breed, and Wealth which procures nothing here but splendid insignificancy.
I am faint and can say no more, and so once again Farewell
I am
Dear Sir Robert
Your old friend
Joseph Fowke
8 July 1796'

Joseph Fowke did not die until 16 May 1800.  The effects at his house in New King Street, Bath, were auctioned in July of that year.  His will bequeathed the whole of his estate to Mary Mortimer, daughter of Hans Winthrop Mortimer of Tottenham Court Road, London.

Bath Chronicle and Weekly Gazette 24 July 1800 British Newspaper Archive

Margaret Makepeace
Lead Curator, East India Company Records

Further reading:
There are many documents for Joseph Fowke and Sir Robert Chambers and their families in India Office Records and Private Papers – search The National Archives Discovery catalogue. 
Articles by T H Bowyer on Joseph Fowke (1716-1800) and Sir Robert Chambers (1737-1803) in Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.
Will of Joseph Fowke  proved 9 August 1800 - The National Archives PROB 11/1346/104.