2. 
M Berens complains that 
Governor Douglas has
               put up to sale, not only a portion of the land which
               had been staked out by himself in 
1858 as claimed by the
               
Hudsons Bay C, but also some of the Buildings upon
               it—and he

 expresses a hope that the 
Duke of Newcastle will
               at once direct the Governor to discontinue proceedings of
               this description, until the title of the Company to the
               lands claimed by them has been decided. In the absence of
               any explanation from 
Governor Douglas it is impossible to
               form an opinion upon the specific facts complained of, but
               the following is the present position of the question in
               regard to the land claims of the 
Hudsons Bay Company in 
British Columbia.
               
               3. Prior to the erection of 
British Columbia into a Colony the 
Hudsons Bay C had occupied many tracts of land for the erection of

 Forts or Trading Establishments as well as for purposes of cultivation. After the
               erection
               of the Colony and the resort to it of Settlers the title
               of the Company to lands so occupied was brought into
               question. There is no doubt that the Company never
               received any formal title to the lands—but they maintain
               that long and continuous occupation gives them a title,
               and that this title is supported by the stipulations in the
               Oregon Treaty of 
1846, in regard to land held by them South
               of Latitude 49 on exactly the same tenure.
               
               4. A considerable correspondence took place on the
               subject in 
1858 -1859
-1859 but without leading to any satisfactory result. Under these circumstances it was
               arranged with
               the Company that the question should be referred to the
               Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, and in order to
               raise it in the regular form, the Company addressed the
               necessary Petitions to Her Majesty in Council—the reference
               of which to the Judicial Committee the 
Duke of Newcastle
               assented to on 
4 of July last. What further steps have
               been since taken to bring the question to decision I do not

               know, but it would be manifestly desirable (if it were possible)
               to obtain a decision of the Judicial Committee at an early
               date. In the meantime it would also be desirable that 
Governor
                  Douglas should abstain from dealing with the Land claimed by
               the Company, except in cases of absolute necessity. If the
               Title of the Company should be affirmed by the Judicial Committee,
               H.M. Government would be clearly at a greater disadvantage in
               dealing with them for land which had been already appropriated,
               then for what had been left untouched in their hands.

 Without,
               therefore expressing any opinion on the transactions alluded to
               by 
M Berens of which we have so little information, I
               would submit that 
Governor Douglas should be directed, pending the settlement of the question before the Judicial Committee,
               to avoid as far as possible all interference with lands claimed
               by the 
Hudsons Bay Company.