Colonial Despatches
The colonial despatches of Vancouver Island and British Columbia 1846-1871
Public Offices document
Hammond, Edmund to Merivale, Herman 18 October 1858, CO 60:2, no. 10636, 92.
Abstract
Public Offices document.
Minutes (4).
Hammond requests that the HBC
prepare a full Statement of the grounds on which they consider the claim to navigate the Columbia River after the expiration of their trading monopoly is to be maintained.
The minutes send a copy to the HBC.
Hammond to Merivale (Permanent Under-Secretary)
I am directed by the Earl of Malmesbury to request that
you will suggest to Secretary Sir Edward Bulwer Lytton, with
reference to your Letter of the 12th
Instant
1
relative to the right of certain subjects of Great Britain to navigate
the River Columbia, whether it might not be desirable, in the first
instance, to request the Hudson's Bay Company to prepare a full Statement
of the grounds on which they consider the claim to navigate the Columbia
River after the expiration of theirtrading
trading monopoly is to be maintained,
and after the cession to the United States of their Possessory Rights, if
an arrangement for such cession should be made.
trading monopoly is to be maintained,
and after the cession to the United States of their Possessory Rights, if
an arrangement for such cession should be made.
Minutes by CO staff
Mr Elliot
I apprehend that on a question arising out of Treaty obligations the For: Office are entitled to decide & call for what infn they may require. And that, therefore, we have nothing else to do than to send the Co a copy of this Letter and ask them to furnish us with the statement which the For: Off: desire.
I apprehend that on a question arising out of Treaty obligations the For: Office are entitled to decide & call for what infn they may require. And that, therefore, we have nothing else to do than to send the Co a copy of this Letter and ask them to furnish us with the statement which the For: Off: desire.
ABd
20 Oct
Lord Carnarvon
The only doubt that occured to my mind was whether the letter already obtained from the H.B. Company (23 Sept 1858) 2 was not intended to afford the very information—so far as tis in their power—which the For: Office here ask for. But I am so imperfectly acquainted with the subject that I dare say there may be a distinction, & at all events I suppose that the Company will not complain of an opportunity to make a fuller statement. If so, they would probably be apprized of the terms of this
demand from the Foreign office?
The only doubt that occured to my mind was whether the letter already obtained from the H.B. Company (23 Sept 1858) 2 was not intended to afford the very information—so far as tis in their power—which the For: Office here ask for. But I am so imperfectly acquainted with the subject that I dare say there may be a distinction, & at all events I suppose that the Company will not complain of an opportunity to make a fuller statement. If so, they would probably be apprized of the terms of this
demand from the Foreign office?
TFE
25 Oct
Yes.
EBL
Oct 29
Footnotes
- = M-FO, 12 Oct 58 re navigation of Columbia FIND ?? Cf. Merivale to Foreign Office, 12 October 1858, 101.
- = letter from HBC (Colvile to Lytton, 23 September 1858, 9790, CO/60/2, p. 143).