I have to request that the enclosed amended Draft Reconveyance of
Vancouvers Island from the Hudsons Bay Co to the Crown may be
substituted for the Draft which accompanied my Report of the 20th
March last. The substitution is required under the following
circumstances.
2. It may be remembered that at a discussion of this matter which
took place at a personal interview with you in August last, it was
doubted whether the Draft taken in conjunction with its
accompanying map, prepared by the Company, of the Victoria District
(Lot 24 Sec 18) might not possibly be held to operate as a
confirmation of Title to the Lands sold by the company previous to
the 1st January 1862. If so this would be going beyond the
intention of the Agreement of 3rd of Febry 1862 which simply
declared that all such previous sales should be valid as against
the Crown.
3. By the original Draft it is proposed that all the Island should
be reconveyed to the Crown except (among other things not now in
question) such portion of theVictoria District (Lot 24 Sec 18) as
is coloured Pink and marked with the letters H.B.C. But the Lots
so coloured and marked include not only the Lands in that district
to be retained by the Company but all Lands purported to be sold by
them before the 1st January 1862. It was thought advisable not to
attempt to delineate the sold Lands on the plan which was to be
attached to the reconveyance, as this might hereafter involve the
Crown in questions respecting the validity of the sales & the
accuracy of the meter and bounds of the different Lots—but only to
delineate on it the Lots reconveyed to the Crown and those in the
actual possession of the Company. It became necessary, therefore,
to recast the description of the parcels in the original Draft and
to bring it to as close an accordance with the provisions of the
Agreement of Febry 1862, as the existing state of facts will allow.
4. As Mr Maynard the Solicitor of the Company had unofficially
seen and approved of the original Draft on the part of the Company,
it was considered right to allow him in like manner to see the
amended Draft. We accordingly sent it to him unofficially in
August last, and it has now been returned to us, with the
accompanying letter from Mr Dallas, stating that Mr Maynard sees
no objection to the alterations. These alterations which, as I
have stated, affect only the parcels are shown in red ink in the
enclosed amended Draft.
5. The Map of the Victoria District which accompanied the Original
Draft has not been altered to correspond with the amended Draft,
but in its present shape it may still assist the Colonial
Authorities who will of course take care, when preparing the plan
of the Victoria District which is to be endorsed on the Deed, to
follow the description contained in the amended Draft, which they
will also take care to make correct, and to distinguish in detail
in the plan only the Lots reconveyed to the Crown and those in the
actual possession of the Company, shading each with a different
colour, and denoting them respectively with the corresponding
numbers and letters in the Draft.
6. Should Mr Cardwell see no objection to the Draft Reconveyance
in its amended shape, I presume it will be dealt with as suggested
in my Report of the 20th March last.
I have the honor to be,
Sir,
Your obedient
humble Servant T.W.C. Murdoch
Sir F. Rogers
This Conveyance of Vancouver Island formed the subject of some
personal interviews which took place in your presence. The
question now is whether to follow Mr Murdoch's present suggestion.
Documents enclosed with the main document (not transcribed)
Note on microfilm as follows: "C.O. 305/30. Folio's 157-158
are large maps and unsuitable for filming on this camera."
Draft copy of an indenture for the reconveyance of
Vancouver Island to the crown, edited as per despatch.
Copy, A.G. Dallas to S. Walcott, Emigration Board,
23 January 1866, forwarding the
draft reconveyance and map and advising that "Mr Maynard sees no
objection to the alteration in the Form of Deed."
Other documents included in the file
Rogers to Attorney General and Solicitor General, 14 February
1866, forwarding the draft reconveyance with a background explanation
of the subject and asking whether the draft "would be sufficient in
form and legal effect."
Minutes by CO staff
This matter has been so long in hand that it shd not be allowed to
[sit?] by.
Sir F. Rogers
The conveyance of the Church Reserve was executed in England in
1864 by the Co. &c and sent to the Colony for execution by Col.
authorities. Mr Walcott cannot give the date and does not think
it necessary.
There is a copy of the "official plan" of Victoria District [off
microfilm] the Land Board. Mr [off microfilm] thinks that there
is no [off microfilm].
The plan referred [to] in Sec. IV. is the same [as] that described
in [off microfilm] as drawn on the back of the conveyance.