[Footnote 41:  This person, Syud Nooradeen, had been captain of the vessel at the outset of the voyage; but had been deposed from the responsible command by an order purporting to come from the merchant who had freighted the ship, but which is now said to have been forged by the supercargo.]

Here, in ordinary cases, the matter might have rested; for though the conduct of this Arab chief would certainly have been indefensible in a civilized country, the worst charge that can be considered as fairly proved against him is that of being a receiver of stolen goods, as the price of his connivance at the appropriation of the rest by the supercargo—­since with the wreck of the ship, whether premeditated or not, he had certainly nothing to do—­and the outrages committed by the wild Bedoweens on the beach can scarcely be laid to his charge.  A far more atrocious insult to the British flag in 1826, when a brig from the Mauritius had been piratically seized at Berbera, (a port on the African coast, just outside the Straits of Bab-el-Mandeb,) and part of her crew murdered, had been expiated by the submission of the offenders, and the repayment of the value of the plunder by yearly instalments, (see WELLSTED’S Arabia, vol. ii. chap. 18;)—­whereas, in the present case, restitution, however reluctant, had been prompt and complete.  But so eager were the authorities in India to possess themselves of the place on any terms, that even while the above-mentioned negotiation was pending, a minute was drawn up (Sept. 28) by the Governor of Bombay, and transmitted to the Governor-general at Calcutta, in which, after stating that “the establishment of a monthly communication by steam with the Red Sea, and the formation of a flotilla of armed steamers, renders it absolutely necessary that we should have a station of our own on the coast of Arabia, as we already have on the Persian Gulf” —­alluding to the seizure of the island of Karrack—­and noticing “the insult which has been offered to the British flag by the Sultan of Aden,” requests permission “to take possession of Cape Aden.” [42] The Governor-general, however, in his reply, (Oct. 16,) appears scarcely of opinion that so strong a measure is warranted by the provocation, and suggests “that satisfaction should, in the first instance, be demanded of the Sultan.  If it be granted, some amicable arrangement may be made with him for the occupation of this port as a depot for coals, and harbour for shelter.  If it be refused, then further measures may be considered.” [43]

[Footnote 42:  Correspondence, No. 16.]

[Footnote 43:  Ibid.  No. 19.]