CO882-(3-4) — Page 321

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference:

C.O. 882

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

| ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE

BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

48

attack was imminent, and Lieutenant Abbott writes on the 6th November that the Chinese scouts brought intelligence that armed parties had assembled the night before above the Residency to attack it, but that they had changed their minds and returned. The Sultan was in a position to get information of this kind before anyone else.

Charge 9.

On the 6th November, Haji Alli and Haji Mat Yassim arrived at Durian Sabating with a message from Ismail that he expected Abdullah to fulfil his part of the contract and attack from Bandar Bahru, in which they were to take part. Abdullah, according to Mat Rouse, said, "How can we resist the white men with so many men-of-war ? We must make a pretence of assisting them." On the following day, however, infor- mation arrived of the repulse of the force under Captain Innes at Bandar Tuah, at which the spirits of the Sultan and those with him revived, and according to the witnesses the Laxamana, Haji Alli, and Haji Mat Yassim went down the river a day or two afterwards, followed by the Sultan and the Shabandar. The circumstance of their going down the river is confirmed, and the date fixed, as the night of the 8th November, by the fact that on that night three boats coming down the river were hailed from a steamer which had the Governor on board, and was anchored between Battak Rabbit and Durian Sabatang, and that upon their coming alongside it was found that the Laxamana headed the party, and that he was going down to Battak Rabbit. The other two boats were probably Haji Alli's and Haji Mat Yassim. The circumstance of their travelling at night is very suspicious, and presumptive that they wished to conceal the object of their mission. The Sultan and Shahbandar came on board the following day.

Haji Alli and Haji Mat Yassim (adverse witnesses), together with Mat Rouse, Haji Driss, and Ngha Pahang, all agree that the division of Haji Moosa's property consisted only of that portion comprised in munitions of war, and that these munitions were taken to Durian Sabatang in seven boats. Haji Alli was arrested on the 10th with a quantity of arms and ammunition in his boat.

Sultan Abdullah denies this charge in toto, but says that about this time he sent to Battak Rabbit for five muskets to arm his watchmen. All the witnesses, however, Haji Mat Yassim, Haji Alli, Haji Driss, Ngha Pahang, and Mat Rouse, agree that he went in person to Battak Rabbit to distribute the property of Haji Moosa, which up to that time he had refused to do, even though he had been recommended to do so by Sir Andrew Clarke in his letter of reproof dated 22nd April. It is hard to believe, there- fore, that the distribution could have been made without his being present. None of the witnesses state what proportion of arms was taken by the Sultan, but the charge is sufficiently established if it be shown satisfactorily that he was present at Battak Rabbit, countenancing the division of the arms and ammunition, which were taken up by the Laxamana, Haji Alli, and Haji Mat Yassim.

Charge 10.

The grounds of this charge are to be found, lat, in the official report of Mr. Swettenham, dated 11th March 1876, in which he says that as Abdullah appeared to be harbouring the Datu Sagor in his boat, he (Mr. Swettenham) gave a written authority to Syed Masahore to arrest the Datu Sagor; 2nd, the direct evidence of Dyang Mooruah as to the circumstances mentioned in the charge; and 3rd, there is the evidence of Maharajah Dindah and Aboo to show that both the Sultan and his chiefs were assisting the refugees from Passir Sala.

Abdullah denies this charge.

Enclosure 9.

For the Consideration, at the next Meeting, of the EXECUTIVE COUNCIL. The evidence relating to the complicity of Perak chiefs in the murder of Mr Birch, late H.B.M's Resident in Perak, having been distributed to the members of the Executive Council, and a full opportunity having been afforded to each member of carefully considering that evidence; copies of the letter, dated 16th September, addressed to Abdullah, specifying the charge against him and certain overt acts connected therewith, as also of the "Sultan's reply, dated 6th October, having likewise been circulated for the

49

consideration of members, the opinion of the Council is requested as to the guilt or innocence of Sultan Abdullah with respect to the general charge, viz. :----

That for some time before the deed was committed, he was conspiring with certain chiefs of Perak and other persons to effect that murder, and to drive Mr. Birch's staff out of Perak; and that the murder of the British Resident, and other outrages therewith connected, were actually committed under his authority and with his assistance; further, that after the said murder was committed, he assisted and protected some of the perpetra- tors thereof.

The opinion of the Council is further requested, in the event of a majority considering that the Sultan is guilty, what course the Council would recommend that the Governor should suggest to the Secretary of State to be adopted with regard to him: whether he should be deposed.

If deposed, whether he should be allowed to remain in the Straits Settlements or in any part of the Malay Peninsula, or whether he should be deported to Labuan or elsewhere.

The opinion of the Council is also desired as to the course which should be adopted with regard to other chiefs, not actual participators in the murder of Mr. Birch, but whom the Council may consider to have been compromised in that murder and in the subse quent outrages in Perak,

1st December, 1876.

(Signed) WM. F. DRUMMOND JERVOIS.

Enclosure 10.

MINUTE of the EXECUTIVE COUNCIL,

At a meeting of the Executive Council, held at Government House on December

9th, 1876,

PRESENT:

His Excellency the Governor,

The Officer Commanding the Troops.

The Acting Judge of Penang.

The Colonial Secretary,

The Attorney General,

The Treasurer.

The Auditor General.

The questions put to the Council by his Excellency the Governor having been finally discussed, the members of the Council are desirous of recording, in the first place, that owing to the acknowledged inexpediency of proceeding by way of a trial, they have not been in a position to do more than weigh the evidence already taken in order to arrive at

■ conscientious opinion upon that evidence, as to whether or not Sultan Abdullah in guilty of the charges brought against him, and whether or not his conduct has been such as to preclude his being allowed to return to Perak.

The Council have fully considered the whole of the evidence taken, respecting the complicity of the several chiefs of Perak in the murder of Mr. Birch, and the subsequent opposition to the capture and punishment of his murderers, and have considered the replies of Sultan Abdullah to the charges which were furnished him.

The Council have also, at his Excellency's request, taken into consideration the case of the other chiefs of Perak not being actual participators in the murder, but who have been implicated in this matter.

1

1

Notwithstanding the fact that Abdullah owed his elevation to the Sultanship to the Government of the Straits Settlements; that the appointment of Mr. Birch as Resident was made at his personal request; it appears impossible to doubt that not only was Sultan Abdullah aware beforehand that Mr. Birch's murder was in contemplation, without taking any steps to prevent it, but there is no reason to doubt that it was committed with his approval and consent, and that for a considerable time before it took place he and his chiefs had been plotting Mr. Birch's destruction. There is also evidence, apparently reliable, that after the murder was committed he assisted and protected some of the perpetrators thereof.

It must be admitted that provocation was given to the Sultan and his chiefs. The late Mr. Birch was a most zealous and conscientious officer. He was, however, much thwarted from the outset, and there is reason to believe that his manner may at times have been G

42002.