Sir F. Rogers
If this Office could have suspected that by complying with
M
Pemberton's request to be invested with a warrant of Appointment as
Surveyor General of
Van Couver I he would have founded this
application my impression is that we should have guarded ourselves by
careful provisos against giving the writer the opp of which he has
availed himself for preferring demands which, in my opinion at least,
cannot be entertained. With the exception of the
Gov The few
Officials of
Van Couver Is are paid out of Colonial Resources. The
local Leg raises the means of defraying the Civil Establishment.
Out of funds over which the Imp
gov has no control
M
Pemberton has hitherto been paid and must continue to be paid. The
proper amount of his Salary is a matter for the Governor & the local
Authorities to settle: nor can this Office take it out of their
hands unless we pay him from the B. Treasury.
M Pemberton treats
the formal Instrument of Appointment as if it conferred on him a
new Office. Now, in my apprehension, we understand nothing of the
kind. By giving him a warrant we meant only to confirm him, in the
ordinary way, in a situation which he had held for several years, &
in virtue of which he is now on leave of absence. I admit that the
Governor's
desp 2317 is susceptible of a double construction, for
whilst he reports having granted
M Pemberton leave of absence for 8
months, & that that Officers salary
w cease from the date of his
quitting the Colony, he talks about any "future appointment" of
Surveyor General which H. M
Gov may contemplate—for which
situation he strongly recommends
M Pemberton. It would almost seem
as if he meant that when
M Pemberton quitted the Colony he lost
Office also. But that must be impossible otherwise why Should he
have granted
M Pemberton leave of absence, and, why as
M
Pemberton mentions in 6776 does he press for his return to the Colony
unless he still regards him as a public Officer of it. A Governor can
of course only give leave of absence to a Public Servant. Nobody
except an Official requires leave of absence to quit a Colony. In
short although I think the Governor's
desp 2317 creates some
embarrassment there are not adequate grounds, according to my view,
for meeting this Application in any other shape than by informing
M
Pemberton that he is under a mistake in supposing that this Office
intended to treat him
otherwise than as a public Officer on leave of
absence, who from peculiar Colonial circumstnces had not hitherto had
a formal Warrant of appointment conferred on him. In giving him a
warrant the step was taken at his own solicitation and he must be
requested to understand that it must rest with the Colonial
Authorities to assign him a Salary, as they have done already in his
provisional capacity.
2. With respect to his enquiry whether he might be placed on the
same footing as
B. Columbia officials with respect to a free passage
I have to state that the answer which shall be given to
M
Pemberton's first request will govern likewise this point. If
M
Pemberton is treated as an official on leave of absence the public
would not pay the Expense of his passage. If this is regarded as a
new appointment I suppose his journey should be paid.
3. As to any extension of his leave of absence see what the Governor
is reported in 6776 to have said to him—viz: that "his leave of
absence was nearly expended, and his speedy return urged."