Colonial Despatches
The colonial despatches of Vancouver Island and British Columbia 1846-1871
Despatch to London
Seymour, Frederick to Grenville, Richard 22 June 1868, CO 60:32, no. 9095, 518.
Abstract
Despatch to London.
Minutes (3), Enclosures (untranscribed) (2), Other documents (1).
Seymour forwards
an Ordinance…entitled No. 10. An Ordinance to Amend,and the attorney general’s report. Seymour relates the reasons why the forwarded ordinance was introduced. Holland’s minute discusses why a similar ordinance was disallowed and recommends sending the ordinance to the Board of Trade.The Shipping Ordinance 1867
No. 63
Victoria
22nd June 1868
My Lord Duke,
I have the honor to forward an Authenticated and two plain
Copies of an Ordinance of the recent Session of the Legislature
of this Colony, entitled
No. 10.
No. 10. An Ordinance to Amend, "The Shipping Ordinance 1867."
No. 10. An Ordinance to Amend, "The Shipping Ordinance 1867."
2. I add the Report of the Attorney General.
3. This Ordinance was introduced to the Legislative Council in
obedience to the instructions conveyed in the third paragraph of
Your Grace's despatch No. 7. of the 5th February 1868. I
did not think it expedient to amend the former ordinance to the
extent suggested by Your Grace. The question of theintroduction
introduction of Foreign bottoms into the Coasting trade is one
which creates so much interest that I feared any fresh attempt
at Legislation on the subject would have unduly prolonged the
Session.
introduction of Foreign bottoms into the Coasting trade is one
which creates so much interest that I feared any fresh attempt
at Legislation on the subject would have unduly prolonged the
Session.
Minutes by CO staff
Mr Elliot
In the Shipping Ordinance of 1867, there was a section (sec. 5) authorizing the Govr in Council to license foreign bottoms in the coasting trade.
In the Shipping Ordinance of 1867, there was a section (sec. 5) authorizing the Govr in Council to license foreign bottoms in the coasting trade.
This was referred to L. Officers—the point as to its validity
having been raised by the B of Trade—& the L. Officers held
that it was repugnant to the Imperial Act and therefore void.
The present
Ordinance repeals the obnoxious section. I
apprehend that the B of Trade considers that, subject to the
objection to sec. 5, the former ordinance might be sanctioned.
But to avoid all questions I would send them copy of the
Ordinance of 1867 & of this Ordinance of 1868 & referring to
the former correspondence state that subject to any observations
which their Lordships may have to make upon the Ordinance of 1867
HG proposes to advise HM to sanction both Ordinances.
Ordinance repeals the obnoxious section. I
apprehend that the B of Trade considers that, subject to the
objection to sec. 5, the former ordinance might be sanctioned.
But to avoid all questions I would send them copy of the
Ordinance of 1867 & of this Ordinance of 1868 & referring to
the former correspondence state that subject to any observations
which their Lordships may have to make upon the Ordinance of 1867
HG proposes to advise HM to sanction both Ordinances.
Documents enclosed with the main document (not transcribed)
Three printed copies of ordinance not on microfilm.
H.P.P. Crease, Attorney General, to Seymour, 22 June 1868,
reporting on the ordinance as per despatch (page 523 missing from
microfilm).
Other documents included in the file
Elliot to Assistant Secretary, Marine Department, Board of
Trade, 31 August 1868, forwarding copy of the despatch and both
ordinances for observations and suggestions.