Colonial Despatches
The colonial despatches of Vancouver Island and British Columbia 1846-1871
Public Offices document
Hammond, Edmund to Fortescue, Chichester April 1860, CO 305:15, no. 4069, 164.
Abstract
Public Offices document.
Minutes (3).
Hammond to Fortescue (Parliamentary Under-Secretary)
April 1860
I have laid before Lord John Russell your letter of the 19th
Instant, inclosing a Despatch from Governor Douglas stating the
reasons which had induced him to delay acting upon the Instructions
addressed to him by The Duke of Newcastle on the 16th of November
last, directing him to place upon the Island of
of San Juan a force
equivalent to that retained by General Scott.
of San Juan a force
equivalent to that retained by General Scott.
I am to request that you will state to The Duke of Newcastle, in
reply, that it appears to Lord John Russell that it would be as well
to wait for further accounts before Governor Douglas' conduct in this
matter is approved by His Grace. Lord John Russell cannot but feel
that Governor Douglas has incurred a serious
serious responsibility in
delaying to act upon The Duke of Newcastle's Instructions of the
16th of November last, and that serious consequences may ensue if
the execution of those Instructions is further delayed.
serious responsibility in
delaying to act upon The Duke of Newcastle's Instructions of the
16th of November last, and that serious consequences may ensue if
the execution of those Instructions is further delayed.
Minutes by CO staff
No draft of approval was prepared: the intention was merely to
ascertain whether the Foreign Office would concur in signifying
approval.
Answer that in accordance with the opinion expressed by Lord John Russell no approval will for the present be signified of the delay to
occupy a part of the Island of San Juan?
I think it is hardly necessary to send any answer.
I observe that my Minute on the despatch was dated
1
17 March
but the letter to the F.O. was not drafted till
11 April. I approved the draft on 12 April and again
another delay in copying & sending till the
19 April. Such delay may often be very inconvenient and in
such a simple matter seems wanting in excuse.
I am not surprised at the observations of the Duke & wish to explain
that the first delay was occasioned by the necessity of circulating
the Governor's desp. 2830 a second time with some fresh papers which
arrived before we were able to execute His Grace's instructions. As
those papers—with the desph in question—did not reach us again for
some time we were forced into a delay, which so far as we were
concerned was unavoidable. The 2d delay is, in a great measure,
attributable to the system of copying we have recourse to. Under
ordinary circes we are scarcely ever able to send a Letter
off under 4 or 5 days at the soonest. In this case, however, as the
delay was one of 7 days I think we must be to blame. At any rate I
am unable now to account for it.
ABd
26 April