Colonial Despatches
The colonial despatches of Vancouver Island and British Columbia 1846-1871
Despatch to London
Seymour, Frederick to Grenville, Richard 10 December 1867, CO 60:29, no. 1215, 556.
Abstract
Despatch to London.
Minutes (6), Enclosures (untranscribed) (1), Other documents (1).
Seymour responds to Buckingham’s enquiry as to how Seymour was aware of Lytton’s proposed
expectationsfor Cooper when Seymour was in Honduras, not British Columbia nor London. Seymour forwards a confidential despatch from Lytton to Douglas regarding Cooper. Cox’s minute discusses how to proceed regarding Cooper given the supporting evidence. Elliot’s minute discusses how to proceed regarding Seymour and the Colonial Office doubting Seymour’s lack of sources for information. Later minutes by Buckingham and Cox discuss how the Colonial Office was unaware of the confidential despatch between Lytton and Douglas regarding Cooper.
No. 159
10th December 1867
My Lord Duke,
I have had the honor to receive Your Grace's despatch No. 63
of the 17th of September on the subject of Mr James Cooper's
application for removal to another Colony.
2.
2. Your Grace observes that I expressed my belief that the
statements contained in Mr Cooper's Memorial as to the
circumstances attending his appointment were correct. But Your
Grace is at a loss to conceive any means by which I can have
knowledge of expectations supposed to have been held out by Lord
Lytton to Mr Cooper, nine years ago, when I was in the Colony
of Honduras.
3. In
3. In explanation of my expression of belief I have the honor
to forward the enclosed copy of a confidential depatch, addressed
by Lord Lytton to Sir James Douglas on the 24th of March 1859.
Minutes by CO staff
Mr Elliot
As the despatch to Gov. Seymour was founded on your minute I pass this thro' you instead of direct to Sir F. Rogers.
As the despatch to Gov. Seymour was founded on your minute I pass this thro' you instead of direct to Sir F. Rogers.
I send you the original draft of this Confidential desp:
founded on a minute of Lord Lyttons. See Vol. 1858 No 1. Also
Sir J. Douglas' answer 2 June 1859—Vol. 1859 No 2. Mr Cooper's
present salary is $1940 = £400 which is all he was intended to
have. But his case is disposed of, & it has only to be considered
what answer shall be given to the personal mention as regards
Gov. Seymour with reference to the Duke of Buckingham's despatch
now acknd.
CC
5/2
I minuted Governor Seymour's former despatch, but I am in no way
responsible for the draft which did not pass through my hands.
The present despatch shows that Governor Seymour was perfectly
well founded in the knowledge which he intimated, although it was
natural that some surprise should be felt at it in the absence of
an explanation from him of it's source.
I think that it only remains to acknowledge this despatch and
to state to Governor Seymour that his explanation shows that he was
quite justified in the knowledgewhich
which he expressed of Lord Lytton's
original arrangement with Mr Cooper, when he went out to British
Columbia.
which he expressed of Lord Lytton's
original arrangement with Mr Cooper, when he went out to British
Columbia.
But how is it this was not known in the Colonial Office when the
matter was brought forward?
B&C
31/3
I hope to satisfy your Grace from accident not from negligence.
B. Columbia had only been recently made over to the Eastern
Dt when Governor Seymour's despatch arrived—& there was no
Gentlemen in the Dt conversant with Columbia correspondence.
But inquiry & search was
made & in the B. Columbia Entry
Volume was found the despatch notifying Mr Cooper's appt
& the conditions on which it was made & no other—nor indeed was
there anything to lead to an idea that [there] could be anything
further. The reason the Confidential despatch was not found arose from
its being entered in a different Vol: namely the Vancouver Entry Book.
Hence when Mr Elliot's minute with your Grace's sanction came
back to the Dt there was no known reason why it should not be
acted on.
made & in the B. Columbia Entry
Volume was found the despatch notifying Mr Cooper's appt
& the conditions on which it was made & no other—nor indeed was
there anything to lead to an idea that [there] could be anything
further. The reason the Confidential despatch was not found arose from
its being entered in a different Vol: namely the Vancouver Entry Book.
Hence when Mr Elliot's minute with your Grace's sanction came
back to the Dt there was no known reason why it should not be
acted on.
CC
2/4
Documents enclosed with the main document (not transcribed)
Other documents included in the file
Draft reply, Buckingham to Seymour, No. 21, 5 April 1868 stating that Seymour was “justified in the Knowledge…expressed of Lord Lytton’s original arrangement with Mr. Cooper.”
Minutes by CO staff
Sir F. Rogers
I have answered His Grace's Enquiry at the end of the Minute.
I have answered His Grace's Enquiry at the end of the Minute.
I think Clause 120 of the Regulations applies to Govr
Seymours despatch of 2 Septt—at all events in spirit—he ought
to have stated what he referred to.