Storks to Merivale
20th August 1858 Immediate
I have laid before the Secretary of State for War your Letter of the 18th inst. in reference to the arrangement to be made with regard to the Detachment of Royal Engineers now under orders to proceed to British Columbia.
Major General Peel desires me to acquaint you in reply that no vote having been takenManuscript imagetaken on account of this service, he regrets that he cannot consent to any portion of the charge being paid from Army Funds. Major General Peel considers that as the officers and men are required for Colonial and Surveying purposes, the Secretary of State for the Colonies should make arrangements with the Treasury for the payment of the whole of the expenses involved. He therefore requests a reconsideration of that portion ofManuscript imageof your Letter relating to this question.
In compliance with Sir E.B. Lyttons wish the General Commanding in Chief will be requested to despatch twenty non commissioned officers and men of the Detachment under the command of a Subaltern officer by the Mail Steamer of the 1st September via Panama, and the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty have been so informed.
His Royal Highness willManuscript imagewill also be requested to select 1 Sergeant and 1 Corporal of Cavalry and 1 Sergeant and 1 Corporal of Artillery to accompany the Expedition.
With regard to the stores Major General Peel is unable to give any directions on the subject until he is informed of the decision at which Sir E B Lytton may arrive as to the articles of which the equipment should consist.
I have the honor to be Sir,
Your obedient Servant
H.K. Storks
Minutes by CO staff
Manuscript image
Mr Merivale
You perceive that the War Office refuse to charge their votes with the regimental pay of this detachment. I felt that it would be so, but was over-ruled. It must be borne in mind that the War Office have to replace and pay for other officers & men, vice those spared to B. Columbia. But this point must be finally settled.
With regard to the Stores.
No orders could be issued for procuring them until the List—so very unfortunately lost—or another copy of it cd be obtained. I have at length had a copy sent me by Sir J. Burgoyne. It is necessary to examine it critically, for I have misgivings that, despite his personal assurances, there are many articles in it which must be dispensed with, not because they are not requisite, but because of the expense. If economy could be disregarded I have no doubt that the articles proposed ought to be sent.
Major Ewart, Sir John Manuscript imageBurgoyne's Secy, has promised me that on Monday the 1st or 2d Captain shall, in the absence of Colonel Moody, who really ought to be on the spot, to work out these details attend at this office, & examine the List, with a view to diminishing the items.
I wd suggest yr sending this Letter & Minute to Sir Edward tonight. Lord Carnarvon can see it on his return to Town on Monday.
ABd. 21 August.
Sir E. B Lytton
On the first point we must submit, I believe.
As to the stores, it seems really hard that Col. Moody, if he has in truth accepted this office, cannot be on the spot, to relieve Mr Blackwood of a labour which is quite out of the range of ordinary duty & experience.
HM Augt 21
I shall be in town Monday, to settle these matters. How come Col. Moody [is] formally declared Lt Govr & Commander in chief in the Times? He should be informed that his presence if but for a day or two is necessary.
EBL Aug 21
In the absence of Col. Moody, Capn Grant & I have gone carefully over the List, & Sir Edward Lytton has sanctioned the deductions we proposed.
ABd. 24 Augt.
Manuscript image
Lord Carnarvon
Have you not seen this.
Sir Edward objects extremely to this view of the War Office, & has some idea of conferring on the subject with Lord Derby, & General Peel.
ABd. 24 Augt. C. Aug. 24.
See on other side.
C. Aug. 25.
Manuscript image
[Other Side]
Mr Merivale
I need not say that a settlement must be come to on this point.
ABd. 25 Augt.
It is a question which can only be settled between Sir E Lytton & Major Genl Peel, and by Lord Derby (with the Chanl of the Excr). If they disagree I do not think further official correspondence would help the solution, in the present shape of the affair. I can only say that so far as my memory serves, I know no instance of the Manuscript imageordinary expense of military protection to a Colony being thrown on the Colonial Estimates. But it will be remembered that the offices of Secretary for War & for the Colonies were combined until 1854.
HM Augt. 25.
It seems preposterous to me that the whole expense sd be charged on Colonial funds here or in N. America. It is true that the 50 or 60 Royal Engineers sent out last year to assist in determining the boundary between B. North America & the United States were charged exclusively to the F.O. account. But that is not a case parallel to the present. That detachment went out solely in the capacity of Engineers & surveyors to decide an international question of dispute. This body of men is sent out for the double purpose of civil surveys, & military organisation & defence. In virtue of this last duty the War Office ought certainly to be liable, so far as it makes itself liable in other colonies.
C. Aug. 25
Other documents included in the file
Manuscript image
Draft, Colonial Office to Chancellor of the Exchequer, 14 October 1858, with extensive revisions, seeking his concurrence that the regimental pay of the Royal Engineers should be borne by the War Office.
Manuscript image
Draft, Elliot to Under Secretary of State for War, 10 November 1858, stating that the Chancellor of the Exchequer agrees with Lytton that the Colonial Office should be responsible only for the "extra pay' for officers and the "working pay" for the men.
Minutes by CO staff
I think it is better to tell the War Office at once that Sir E. Lytton has consulted the Chancellor of the Exchequer on this subject, & that they are both agreed. I have not thought it necessary, as indeed it would not be usual, to mention that Lord Derby also concurs.
It has not appeared to me requisite to write a more detailed Letter to the War Office, as that office Manuscript imageis master of all the facts contained in our Letter to the C. of the Exchequer, if only it will admit them.
ABd. 26 Oct.
I conclude that this is right, as the Chancellor of the Exchequer was consulted officially—altho' that is rather an unusual course.
TFE 28 Oct