Colonial Despatches

Mr Elliot [first two entries crossed out]
Copy to Acting Governor and instruct him to cause payment of this claim to be made to the Paymaster General to the credit of Naval Services.

Draft.

Mr Elliot
I thought it advisable to investigate this claim before we proferred it to the Governor, and Mr Pennell has been so obliging as to supply me with a memn which I have gone over carefully. The result is that the claim may be reduced to a small compass.

£155.9.4 of said claim has been paid & the Admy informed thereof on the 18 Jany last.

£14.13.4 has also been paid by the Crown Agents; but as we have not formally informed the Admy of this fact it remains that we should do so: and we can make mention of it in the letter wh. will have to be written in my division. Further we have told the C. Agents to pay £69.18.2, & should now desire them to pay the percentage money—£3.9.8—due on the supply to the Colony of B.C. together with £1.11.3 for supplies from the Sutlej.

Therefore we have to explain to the Admy where payments have been made & tell them that the C. Agents have been directed to pay the residue amounting to

	3. 9. 8
	1.11 .3
£	5. 0.11

and instruct the Agents and the Govr accy.

Much obliged for the investigation. Drafts.

Mr Blackwood
This letter from the Admiralty is incorrect and misleading—the facts of the case are these. On the 4th of July 1865 the Admiralty sent in a claim for stores supplied to various Colonies amounting to £243.10.6. This was composed of three sums as under

(1st)	For	New Zealand	£155. 9. 4
(2ly)		Hong Kong	14.13. 4
(3ly)		B. Columbia (Bentinck Arm Expn)	73. 7.10
			£243.10. 6

Items 1 & 2 have actually been paid to the Admiralty, and of the payment of the larger of these two (£155.9.4) they have been informed. (See letter to Admty 18 Jany/66 Gov/373/65 New Zealand). The payment of the Hong Kong item £14.13.4 has I learn from Mr Sargeaunt been made by the Agents but the Admiralty have not been informed of it's actual payment by this office—perhaps they should now be told.

The history of the British Columbia item to which the enclosure to the present Admiralty letter refers is the claim of £73.7.10 made as above was supposed here to belong to the Foreign Office, it was withdrawn by the Admiralty accordingly—and was made on the Foreign Office—but as a percentage is charged on Colonial Supplies which is not in regard to those of other Departments—the percentage amounting to £3.9.8 was deducted when the claim was made on the F.O.—i.e. the claim made on that Department was £69.18.2. The Foreign Office repudiated it and it was renewed on this Department but the Admiralty made an omission in not then adding on the percentage again. Consequently they made the claim £69.18.2 whereas it ought to have been renewed as it originally stood £73.7.10.

The Agents have been told to pay £69.18.2 and the Admiralty have been informed that they have been desired to do so. It now remains to authorize the Agents to pay for the balance or percentage

	73. 7.10
	69.18. 2
£	3. 9. 8

and the Govt to paythe the Agents.

By the foregoing it will be seen that the Admiralty now make a claim as outstanding of £243.10.6 which they had made in July /65—that they have already been informed of the actual payment of £155.9.4—that £14.13.4 has also actually been paid, and that instructions have been given of which the Admiralty have been informed for the payment of the £69.18.2. All that remainsnow now to be authorized to be paid to them is £3.9.8 on account of the Bentinck Arm Expedition, together with the fresh claim which they make for £1.11.3 for supplies from H.M.S. Sutlej in July 1864.

Accountant General Beeby to Secretary of the Admiralty, 13 March 1866, stating revisions in amount to be paid to the credit of naval services on account of the Bentinck Arm expedition, with short statement appended thereto.

Elliot to Crown Agents, 31 March 1866, authorizing payment of certain sums to the credit of naval services.