Walcott to Elliot (Assistant Under-Secretary)
Emigration Office
31 August 1860
Sir
With reference to
Sir Frederic Rogers Letter of the
14th instant, enquiring the best mode, and the cost
of conveyance to
British Columbia of the wives and
children (amounting to 10 statute Adults,) of 7 men
belonging to the corps of Royal Engineers, I have the
honor to inform you that having made the necessary enquiries
both
both at Liverpool and
London I find that there is not at
present any Vessel on the berth at either Port proceeding
direct to
British Columbia.
2. There are two Ships at Liverpool bound for
San Francisco but they both object to take passengers and the
route to that Port viâ
New York is not to be recommended.
3. From
London two Vessels will shortly be put up
to sail about the end of October round Cape Horn, and the
Brokers have been requested to communicate
with
with our Officer
when the date of departure is fixed.
4. The cost of a steerage passage in an enclosed Cabin
in these Vessels will be about 25 guineas for each statute
Adult, if the Vessels do not come within the operation of
the Passengers Act, but as the outward freight requires
only small Ships, 10 statute Adults would probably bring
them within the Act, in which case the price for so small
a party would probably be increased to 30 or 35 guineas
per adult. The length of
the
the voyage would be about six months.
5. But there is another and much more expeditious
route, namely by the Royal Mail Steamers from Southampton
to
San Francisco viâ Colon and the
Panama Railroad. Unless,
however, some special contract could be made with the Company
the cost for the party would be £375. The length of the
voyage to
Vancouvers Island would be about two months and
the best Steamer to take would be that which leaves on
the 17
th of each month.
The
6. The objections to this route for Women and children
besides its costliness are the breaks and transhipments on the voyage.
Minutes by CO staff
Mr Elliot
According to the last paragraph of our Desp: of the
21 July (annexed) it is intended, I conclude, to
await the Gov
rs reply before taking any further
steps in this matter?