Public Offices document.
Minutes (4), Enclosures (untranscribed) (1), Marginalia (1).
This document contains mentions of Indigenous Peoples. The authors of these documents
often perpetuate a negative perspective of Indigenous Peoples and it is important
to look critically at these mentions. They sometimes use terminology that is now considered
hurtful and offensive. To learn more about modern terminology pertaining to Indigenous
Peoples, Indigenous ways of knowing, and decolonization, please refer to the Glossary of terms.
Colvile writes to Pakington to respond to the various points of a forwarded letter, written by an anonymous settler
living on Vancouver Island, which is critical of Douglas’ and the HBC’s management of the colony.
The minutes conclude that the the labour-related issues raised by Colvile warrant a transmittal of the anonymously written letter to the Land and Emigration Board.
This file encloses a draft letter to Colvile, which endorses the relaxation of labour requirements for farms of fewer than 100
acres on Vancouver Island.
Hudson's Bay House
1st December 1852
Sir,
I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of Mr T.F. Elliot's
letter of the 3rd Instant [ultimo], addressed to Mr Barclay,
Secretary of the Hudson's Bay Company, enclosing an Extract of a letter
from a gentleman residing at Vancouver's Island, relative to the
condition and prospects of that Settlement, on which I have to make the
following observations.
Before proceeding to notice what is stated in this Extract I must
respectfully submit that when the conduct of the Governor and Committee
of the Hudson's Bay Company is thus complained of it would have been
more satisfactory if the name of the writer had been communicated.
There can be no doubt that the system represented to be followed by
the Government of the United States in the disposal of land in the
Oregon territory must retard the settlement of Vancouver's Island, and
with the attraction of the gold district of California, make it
difficult to retain the service of labourers at almost any rate of
wages, but it is evident that no course of conduct on the part of the
Hudson's Bay Company could have prevented this result, and the remedy
suggested by the writer of the letter would tend to enhance the rate of
wages, and make it more difficult, or rather impossible, for persons of
capital to cultivate the land or engage in any business that required
the employment of labourers; for men are not disposed to become hired
servants when they can cultivate their own land.
When the Hudson's Bay Company undertook to conduct the settlement
of the Island, the principle of the measures to be taken for that
purpose were fully discussed with the Secretary of State for the
Colonies, and the price of the land to Settlers, and the condition of
bringing a certain number of labourers into the Island were submitted to
and approved of by him, the plan being considered the best that could be
devised to secure a bona fide cultivation of the land.
Mr Merivale
.par
Would it not be as well to ask the opinion of the Govr on this
point. As we complain of the Company doing nothing, it might be
desirable for us not to neglect the small opening they give us of
promoting the interests of the Settlement. See P. 2 of Mr Staine's
Letter.
The price of the
land is 20s/- per acre, of this 1/10th belongs to the Hudson's
Bay Company for their trouble in conducting the sales, and the
9/10ths is held in Trust for Colonial purposes.
With respect to the farms in progress of being established by the
Puget Sound Company, this obligation of bringing in labourers has been
more than fulfilled, and the cases in which it has been relaxed are
those where the purchasers of land were already resident in the country,
and, from their having been in the employment of the Company, it was
expected they might influence the labourers, whose term of service
expired, to take service with them for the cultivation of their lands.
Under existing circumstances it may perhaps be expedient not to insist
on the purchasers of land, to some limited extent say not exceeding 100
acres, bringing in labourers, and if you should be of this opinion, and
shall signify the same, the Directors of the Hudson's Bay Company will
adopt that rule for the future.
It is not true that theHudson's Bay Company exercise any monopoly
in Vancouver Island. The fishing of the seas, inlets, and rivers is
free to all the inhabitants, and the importation of goods is free to all
the world, and in no case where parties have applied for room in the
Company's ships has it been refused, except for Spirits. The Indians are numerous,
and, unless the intercourse with them is carefully and
prudently conducted, would be dangerous; for this reason, as well as for
the sake of the Indians themselves, the use of Spirits has been
prevented, or rather discouraged, as far as the power of the Company can
be exercised. But the Company neither claims the right of, nor
practically exercises any, exclusive dealings with the Indians of the
Island.
The Island is in no respect given over "bound hand and foot" to the
Hudson's Bay Company, except that it is only from them that a title can
be obtained for the land, but the terms on which land can be obtained is
published, and in no case has an application for land been refused on
those terms which are equally applied to all applicants.
The writer of the letter asserts "that persons have been driven off
the Island by the illiberal policy of the Government, literally in one
instance, which I am well acquainted with, by the jealousy of the
Company's agents here, &c." I never heard of any thing that could
justify this assertion, and I do not believe that Mr Douglas, who
holds Her Majesty's Commission as Governor of the Island, would act upon
any such motives. But if the case and circumstances are brought forward
in a tangible shape by naming the party and the accuser, the strictest
enquiry shall be made, and the result reported to you. Perhaps the
better course would be for you to call officially upon the Governor, who
is appointed by the Crown, for an explanation, if you think the bare
assertion of the writer of the letter is worthy of enquiry.
From all these circumstances the animus of the writer may be
inferred.
It is true that no Church or Chapel has been built, but authority
has been given to Governor Douglas to do so when he finds it expedient,
and can accomplish it. The plan of a Church has been sent home, but no
estimate of the expence, otherwise they would have been submitted for
your consideration, as is required to be done before being carried into
execution. In the meantime there are the means of having Divine Service
in one of the buildings in Fort Victoria, and I believe our
instructions, that there should be Divine Service regularly, are duly
attended to.
In 1848 the Revd Robert J. Staines was engaged to conduct a
school for boys, and his wife one for girls. The officers in the
service of the Company subscribed £340 p[er] annum towards this
establishment for the sake of education for their children. The
Hudson's Bay Company granted £100 p[er] annum to Mr Staines to act as
Chaplain to the Company at their establishment at Fort Victoria, and the
Fur trade branch of the Company grant him another £100 p[er] annum as a
contribution towards the Schools.
The Governor and Committee certainly have not assigned a place for
a burying ground, conceiving that this would of course be done by the
authorities on the Spot.
I have the honor to be Sir
Your obedient Humble St A. Colvile
Governor
Mr Merivale
I do not see what use can be made of this letter. The Company seem
annoyed, & perhaps with some reason, that the name of the Writer of a
letter reflecting upon their Administration should be withheld. Mr
Staines receives a portion of his emoluments from the Company and it is
to be hoped that his interests will not be ultimately prejudiced should
they discover that he is the Author?
Put by. The price of £1 put upon land in V.I. was certainly part
of the original scheme, & thought at the time a wise measure (the
Wakefield notions being then still popular). But it is not required by
the Crown grant, which only directs a "reasonable price" to be put upon
land by the Company.
Mr Blackwood has pointed out a passage at p. 3 which makes me
think it desirable not to "put by" as I at first minuted, but to
transmit this letter to the Ld & Emn Board, & ask their opinion of
the suggestion contained in that passage.
Documents enclosed with the main document (not transcribed)
Draft, Colonial Office to Colvile, 14 February 1853, stating that
Newcastle had no objection to relaxing the regulation requiring
purchasers of less than 100 acres of land to bring in labourers.