Walcott to Rogers (Permanent Under-Secretary)
Emigration Office
10 October 1863
I have to acknowledge Mr Elliot's Letter of the 6th instant with a Letter from the War Department enquiring whether the privileges in the acquisition of Land in British Columbia accorded to Naval and Military Settlers by a proclamation of the Governor dated the 23rd of February 1863 admit ofextensionManuscript image extension to Officers of the Indian Army.
2. The object of the regulations under which these privileges are granted, is to encourage the permanent settlement in the Colony of Officers who have served the Crown in a Military or Naval capacity. As the Officers of the Indian Army are now placed under the Secretary of State for War, and can I presume comply with the conditions of the Colonial Law by obtaining the requisite certificate of the General Commanding in Chief showing the length of their service andthatManuscript image that their settlement in the Colony has been sanctioned I see no reason why Officers in the Indian Army should not be placed on the same footing as Officers of the other portion of Her Majesty's Land forces, in the acquisition of Land in those Colonies which concede such privileges.
I have the honor to be
Your obedient
Humble Servant
S. Walcott
Minutes by CO staff
Manuscript image
Sir F. Rogers
Would you send the War Office a copy of their letter or simply ansr that the Duke of Newcastle sees no objections to the terms and conditions of the Proclamation of the Govr of B.C. dated 23 Feby/63 in respect to military settlers in that Colony being announced to the Govr of India as applicable to the Officers of H.Ms Indian Army.
ABd 12 Oct
At once. Simply answer as above.
FR 12/10
Other documents included in the file
Manuscript image
Rogers to Under-Secretary of State, War Office, 15 October 1863, advising that Newcastle had no objection to the proclamation being applicable to officers of the Indian army.