The Journal of the Siam Society Vol. LXXII, Part 1-2, 1984 - Khamkoo

THE 1902 SIAMESE~KELANTAN .TREATY 105
ascertain the latter's power ~d authority vis .. a-vis Kelal\t&Q. HQwev~r, tP.e $Ql~n
later changed his mind and chose the traditional means of s.olving the difficulty by
making a trip to Bangkok in versoll to 1'-Y his complaints ~gaiQst. the Siam~e Cont,.
missioner. The Sultan also a!Jked for the recall of the Co.U,missionctr and all hi$ troops
to Bangkok.2' The move failed to achieve the desired effect. From Kelantan's viewpoint,
the situation worsened. Kelantan was visited in succession by Siamese l!eniot
officials, Phraya Sukhum and Phraya Sri Sahadheb.2s ·· The principal o'bjectiv~ was to
exact an official undertaking from the Raja of Kelantan not to conclude.&llY de!ll with
foreigners without the written sanction of the King of Siam. The Raja finl!.lly agreed
to abide by this instruction, as recorded in his Memorandum of Octo~ 27,1901.29
By this time, the Raja and the anti-Thai party were convinced that their position
and interests could only be safeguarded against the Siamese encroachment, which aimed
to incorporate Kelantan into the Siamese Kingdom proper, by asldng for help from the
Straits Settlements Government whose inclination to interfere against Siamese activities
in the two northeastern Malay States must have been common knowledge among them.
Once this measure was adopted in May, the Kelantan RU:ler became determine4 to be
dd of his traditional overlord, wbose suzerain authority he lloW categorily deQied in the
legal fashion best understood by his to-be Western patron, though it was a'Qsolutely
alien to the long-existing intra-regional relations.30
There could be no doubt that Siam's attempts to consolidate hCl' loosely-tied
kingdom in the last years of the nineteenth century had a very alarming effect on the.
Kelantanese leaders, especially among the anti-Siamese party who saw in the strengthening
of the Siamese authority in Kelantan the end of their recently acquired asCCll- .
dancy, and thus were determined to resist Siam to the very end, if need be.3 1 On the
Siamese side, the trouble in Kela~tan truly began with Duff and the concessions which
distinctly brought to the fore the ineffective overseering power of Siam, which in turn
threatened Britain's privileges and special position as well as the Sian)~lie claims in the
27. Robert, op. cit., pp. 82-3.
All the Siamese soldiers s~tioned in Kota B!lhru had been sent at the request of Raja Senik
himself in 18~9 to protect him and strengthen his position against his political rivals at ihe·
time of succession.
28. Phraya Sukhum was the superintendent com~issioner of Monthon Nakhon; Phraya Sri
Sahadheb was the under-secretary of th.e Ministry of the lnterior and believed to be the most
able Siamese official at the time. . .
29. Tower to Lansdowne, January 31, 1902, quoted in Robert, op. cit., pp. 266-8.
30. FO 422/56, the Sultan of ~~a~tan to Swett1Jlham, Jun~ 4, 190Z, "Kelantan has not up to
the present had any Treaty with Siam".
n fO 422fS6, Svve«eqh(4rQ tQ Cllam.~~'lain; Mar J6, 190Z,