Colonial Despatches
The colonial despatches of Vancouver Island and British Columbia 1846-1871
Despatch to London
Birch, Arthur Nonus to Cardwell, Edward 16 September 1865, CO 60:22, no. 10733, 366.
Abstract
Birch, Arthur Nonus to Cardwell, Edward 16 September 1865, CO 60:22, no. 10733, 366.
Despatch to London.
Minutes (2), Enclosures (untranscribed) (5), Other documents (1).
No. 111
16th September 1865
Sir,
In the Autumn of 1862, a Constable travelling with Mr
O'Reilly, the Gold Commissioner of the Cariboo District was
robbed of a sum of Public Money amounting to five hundredand
and
eighty six pounds 5s/10d (£586.5.10).
Since that date Mr O'Reilly has
been held responsible for the amount and it still appears as
a balance against his Collectorate in the Books of the Treasury.
and
eighty six pounds 5s/10d (£586.5.10).
Since that date Mr O'Reilly has
been held responsible for the amount and it still appears as
a balance against his Collectorate in the Books of the Treasury.
2. Mr O'Reilly has recently applied to me to know if the
Secretary of State has relieved him of his liability in this
matter but I cannot find that the subject has ever beenbrought
brought
before the Colonial Office although in a Minute attached to the
original correspondence Sir James Douglas desires that Mr O'Reilly
may be informed that the matter will be referred for the favorable
consideration of the Secretary of State.
brought
before the Colonial Office although in a Minute attached to the
original correspondence Sir James Douglas desires that Mr O'Reilly
may be informed that the matter will be referred for the favorable
consideration of the Secretary of State.
3. I forward herewith copies of the whole correspondence which
will fully explain the facts of the case and I beg to recommend
thatauthority
authority may be given to enable the Treasury to pass the
amount in Mr O'Reilly's collectorate account.
authority may be given to enable the Treasury to pass the
amount in Mr O'Reilly's collectorate account.
Minutes by CO staff
Mr Elliot
We have no information on the subject of this robbery. If it should be decided to relieve Mr O'Reilly from the liability the Papers should go to the Treasury with a recommendation to that effect?
We have no information on the subject of this robbery. If it should be decided to relieve Mr O'Reilly from the liability the Papers should go to the Treasury with a recommendation to that effect?
VJ
6 Nov
It looks like very discreditable carelessness on all
sides and I do not see reasons which would justify our offering
to the Treasury a favorable recommendation. I would suggest
that we send the papers to them for their consideration and
request to be favored with their Lordships' opinion on the
decision which it would be proper to take upon the subject.
sides and I do not see reasons which would justify our offering
to the Treasury a favorable recommendation. I would suggest
that we send the papers to them for their consideration and
request to be favored with their Lordships' opinion on the
decision which it would be proper to take upon the subject.
Documents enclosed with the main document (not transcribed)
Peter O'Reilly, to W.A.G. Young, Colonial Secretary, 6 November
1862, explaining how the money had been lost.
Affidavit of Constable Stephen Edwards, 15 October 1862,
describing how the money came to be stolen from him.
O'Reilly to Colonial Secretary, 1865, referring back to the
incident and asking whether the Secretary of State had been consulted
and had agreed to relieve the charge from Treasury accounts.
Other documents included in the file
Elliot to G.A. Hamilton, Treasury, 11 November 1865, forwarding
copy of the despatch and enclosures for consideration.