XML | Preceding document | Next document | Cite this document

Despatch to London
Douglas, James to Labouchere, Henry 22 January 1858, CO 305:9, no. 2461, 4.

Abstract
Despatch to London. Minutes (4), Other documents (1).
Douglas writes concerning Cameron’s salary. Aware that the decision has been handed over to the HBC, Douglas argues that as Cameron received his appointment from Her Majesty’s Government he should have the support of the government as opposed to the HBC.
The minutes state the Douglas’s request seems reasonable in substance but can’t come to decision without knowing the intentions of the HBC.
Enclosed is a draft reply from Stanley to Douglas informing him that the local legislature should find means of defraying Cameron’s salary.
No. 3
22 January 1858
1. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your Despatch No 14 of the 6th of November last in reply to my letter of the 28th of July, in which I requested your instructions as to the amount and payment of the Salary to be assigned to Mr Cameron the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court ofVancouver'sManuscript image Vancouver's Island Vancouver's Island, and I observe that you have referred the question to the Hudson's Bay Company, with whom it appears the decision rests.
2. As Mr Cameron received his appointment from Her Majesty's Government, and as it is obviously conducive to the best interests of the Colony, and to his efficiency as Judge, that he should be placed in a perfectly respectable and independent position as to the emoluments of his office, may I request the support of Her Majesty's Government, in favor of any measures, having that object in view, which may be hereafter proposed by the Hudson's Bay Company.
I have etc.
Minutes by CO staff
Manuscript image
Mr Elliot
[ABd] 15 March/58
Mr Merivale
TFE 18 March
The request seems reasonable in substance, but I do not see how Government can pledge themselves beforehand to any measure (without knowing what) which the H.B.C. may adopt in favour of Mr Cameron. Perhaps this desp. had better be communicated to the Company & they may be asked whether it refers to any project entertained by them (see our draft of 6 Nov).
HM Mh 17
C M 18
The pledge asked for by the Governor is too vague for any Dept to assent to: better ask the H.B.Co as propd.
S 18
Other documents included in the file
Manuscript image
Draft reply, Stanley to Douglas, No. 2, 30 April 1858.