Colonial Despatches
The colonial despatches of Vancouver Island and British Columbia 1846-1871
Correspondence (private letter)
Moody, Richard Clement to Fortescue, Chichester 4 January 1865, CO 60:23, no. 129, 304.
Abstract
Correspondence (private letter).
Minutes (2), Other documents (1).
Moody to Under-Secretary of State
Chatham
January 4th 1865
Sir,
I have only recently had the honour to receive your letter dated
6th Ultmo with Enclosure. It was addressed to me at the United
Service Club Pall Mall and by an oversight there was not forwarded to me.
In reply I beg to submit the following Statement to the
favourable consideration of the Secretary of State.
All my accounts in British Columbia were passed with the exception
of the two Items referred to and with respect to them the facts are
simply as follows.
Item 3£.17s.0d. Captain GrantRE with
RE with the Detachment
under his command were despatched from England Via Panama in 1858.
Some of the expense was to be defrayed by the War Department. Money was
advanced to him through me by H.M. Treasury on authority of Secretary of
State. Captain Grant erroneously charged this particular item of his
Accounts as a Military Acct to the War Department through his
Agents. It was as a matter of course disallowed. The War Department
meeting no charge but Military Pay alone.
RE with the Detachment
under his command were despatched from England Via Panama in 1858.
Some of the expense was to be defrayed by the War Department. Money was
advanced to him through me by H.M. Treasury on authority of Secretary of
State. Captain Grant erroneously charged this particular item of his
Accounts as a Military Acct to the War Department through his
Agents. It was as a matter of course disallowed. The War Department
meeting no charge but Military Pay alone.
Had he gone out with his Detachment in the ordinary course of
Military Service this item would have been chargeable to War Dept
and would not have been disallowed.
He should have defrayed it outof
of the sum advanced to him by the
Treasury and brought it forward in the rest of his Accounts and it would
have been passed with them.
of the sum advanced to him by the
Treasury and brought it forward in the rest of his Accounts and it would
have been passed with them.
When it was laid before me in the Colony I discharged it. He
was really entitled to it and under the circumstances in which the
RE went to British Columbia it cannot be charged to nor recovered from
the War Dept.
With reference to the other item 40£.7s.10d I have to
state, the Governor of British Columbia received a Despatch from the
Secretary of State in April 1860, I cannot recall the date, nor the
precise words but they were to the effect that on the receipt of that
Despatch Captain Lempriere was to return to England ceasing to be
borneon
on the strength of the RE in British Columbia. Governor Douglas
communicated this to me. Captain Lempriere was up the Country on a
temporary Service. I ordered him back at once to Head Quarters and to
deliver over the charge of the Stores to another officer.
on the strength of the RE in British Columbia. Governor Douglas
communicated this to me. Captain Lempriere was up the Country on a
temporary Service. I ordered him back at once to Head Quarters and to
deliver over the charge of the Stores to another officer.
He was the Officer who had special charge of them.
These Stores were very numerous and valuable and the receipts
and issues were a great responsibility. The proper checking and delivery
over took some time and I could not properly discharge him from duty in
B Columbia until it was accomplished. No time was lost in sending for
him, in his returning, and in his delivering over the Stores. His
Colonial Pay ceased with his Colonial duty and he left the Colony.
When
When my periodical accounts were sent in, I was informed the
Governor refused the Pay from the actual date of receiving the despatch
from the Secretary of State.
I submitted that Captain Lempriere was relieved as soon as possible,
and explained the nature of the duties that were indispensable prior
to his being released.
I cannot remember the words of the correspondence, but if my
memory serves me right I requested that the matter might be submitted to
the Secretary of State. The question was not raised again until my
leaving the Colony & My impression is that it either had been or was to
be referred home.
From the words used in H.E. Governor Seymour's Despatch it is clear
he considersthat
that as the charge was on a "Military Requisition" it was
not an item for Colonial disbursement. I may state however that our
Colonial Pay and other charges of the RE on Colonial Acct
(acknowledged as not chargeable to War Dept) were ordered by
H.E. Governor Douglas to be placed on "Military Requisition Forms."
This was done I believe for convenience in classifying Lands & Works
Expenditures and it was convenient.
that as the charge was on a "Military Requisition" it was
not an item for Colonial disbursement. I may state however that our
Colonial Pay and other charges of the RE on Colonial Acct
(acknowledged as not chargeable to War Dept) were ordered by
H.E. Governor Douglas to be placed on "Military Requisition Forms."
This was done I believe for convenience in classifying Lands & Works
Expenditures and it was convenient.
The charge in question was for Colonial Service entirely and
not chargeable to War Dt and ceased when the Officer's Colonial
Duty ceased.
I venture to trust these detailed Explanations of the circumstances
under which the above charges occurred may induce the Secretary of State
to removethe
the disallowances standing against me.
the disallowances standing against me.
On referring to the Secretary of States despatch to H.E. Governor
Douglas, the particular phrase will be noticed, the adherence to the
very letter of which, I was informed was the ground of the disallowance.
The Under Secretary of State
for the Colonies
for the Colonies
Minutes by CO staff
Mr Elliot
I conclude that this explanation will be considered satisfactory. Capt: Lempriere was recalled from service in B. Columbia on his promotion. The terms of the S. of S. Desp (of which a Copy is annexed) were "Until his recall shall reach the Colony" &c—but he had under his charge certain valuable Govt Stores and until he had accounted for them & delivered them up to the proper authority he must I think be regarded as in the employment of the Colonial Govt and therefore entitled to his Colonial Pay?
I conclude that this explanation will be considered satisfactory. Capt: Lempriere was recalled from service in B. Columbia on his promotion. The terms of the S. of S. Desp (of which a Copy is annexed) were "Until his recall shall reach the Colony" &c—but he had under his charge certain valuable Govt Stores and until he had accounted for them & delivered them up to the proper authority he must I think be regarded as in the employment of the Colonial Govt and therefore entitled to his Colonial Pay?
With regard to the Sum of £3.17 erroneously charged by Capt
Grant to the War Dept & disallowed I presume that Colonel Moody's
explanation will be accepted.
VJ
6 Jan
I think that Coll Moody makes out his case very clearly, and
that he is entitled to a relief from both the surcharges. Although
the words "until his recall shall reach the Colony" look very precise
there can be no doubt that the meaning of the Secretary of State was
that Capn Lempriere's Colonial pay was to last until he was relieved
from his Colonial duties. It would be mere pedantry to insist that
on account of wording which was perhaps more precise than careful, an
Officer should be kept in the discharge of Colonial functions and yet
be deprived of his Colonial pay.
I submit a draft.
TFE
11 Jany
