Colonial Despatches
The colonial despatches of Vancouver Island and British Columbia 1846-1871
Correspondence (private letter)
Franks, Charles William to Grenville, Richard 31 May 1867, CO 60:31, no. 5317, 237.
Abstract
Correspondence (private letter).
Minutes (5), Other documents (1).
Franks requests to view
any official communications from the Governor of British Columbia to the Secretary of State since the 1st of November lasrelating to Franks and his role as Colonial Treasurer. Cox’s minute lists and describes the communications between Seymour and Carnarvon and Buckingham and suggests allowing a friend of Franks’s to view the correspondence so Franks’s friend can advise Franks on whether Franks should have the publications published. Elliot’s minute supports Cox’s suggestion. Adderley minutes that he
should simply declineFranks’s request, which Buckingham supports.
Franks to Buckingham
Langham Hotel
May 31st 1867
My Lord Duke,
I have the honour to request that I may be furnished with copies
of any official communications from the Governor of British Columbia
to the Secretary of State since the 1st of November last, bearing
on my character or conduct in the discharge of my duties as Colonial
Treasurer.
Minutes by CO staff
Mr Elliot
The despatches relating to Mr Franks are 24 Feby No 35, Confidential 24 Feby, & a further Confidential dated the 10 April recd on the 27 instt which was not before the Duke of Buckingham when he appd the last letter to Mr Franks. It would not however I think have affected that answer. It is sent on herewith 5084—you will see by the letter addressed to him by Mr Birch on the 19th Jan (in 5084) that Mr Franks was informed that the Govr considered "his conduct in the matter referred to improper & that he would bring the matter before the Secy of State." It appears further that the Govr offered that this letter shd be withdrawn—that the Council however were of opinion that it was a proper letter—but that as it [is] desirable that Mr Franks should leave the Colony at once, Mr F. should be informed that if he left the Colony at once no further steps should be taken agt him. I suppose meaning that the Govr should not enter upon a consideration of Mr F's conduct since he held office. Whether Mr Franks was informed does not appear.
The despatches relating to Mr Franks are 24 Feby No 35, Confidential 24 Feby, & a further Confidential dated the 10 April recd on the 27 instt which was not before the Duke of Buckingham when he appd the last letter to Mr Franks. It would not however I think have affected that answer. It is sent on herewith 5084—you will see by the letter addressed to him by Mr Birch on the 19th Jan (in 5084) that Mr Franks was informed that the Govr considered "his conduct in the matter referred to improper & that he would bring the matter before the Secy of State." It appears further that the Govr offered that this letter shd be withdrawn—that the Council however were of opinion that it was a proper letter—but that as it [is] desirable that Mr Franks should leave the Colony at once, Mr F. should be informed that if he left the Colony at once no further steps should be taken agt him. I suppose meaning that the Govr should not enter upon a consideration of Mr F's conduct since he held office. Whether Mr Franks was informed does not appear.
It appears to me that if it is not wished to press hardly on Mr
Franks' some friend of his might be allowed to peruse all the papers
confidentially & then advise Mr F. whether he should press for the
production of the Governor's correspondence.
CC
31 May
My leaning would still be in favor of sending Mr Franks the
second of the two answers suggested in my minute on 4974 B. Columbia.
But there is also much to be said in favor of Mr Cox's suggestion
to offer to show the despatches to a friend of Mr Franks's, which
possibly the Duke may think best.
TFE
31 May
I dont think Mr Franks has a friend whose judgment he would
defer to. Those who have interested themselves in his case are
already satisfied that nothing can be done. Besides, would it be for
the interests of the service that such Confidential information
should be shown?
I should simply decline.
Other documents included in the file
Minutes by CO staff
TFE
17/6