Colonial Despatches
The colonial despatches of Vancouver Island and British Columbia 1846-1871
Despatch to London
Birch, Arthur Nonus to
Cardwell, Edward 14 July 1866, CO 60:25, no. 8290, 49.
Abstract
Birch, Arthur Nonus to
Cardwell, Edward 14 July 1866, CO 60:25, no. 8290, 49.
Despatch to London.
Minutes (5), Other documents (4).
No. 56
14th July 1866
Sir,
Your despatch No. 23 of the 30th April directs me to
reduce the expenditure of the present year to such an amount
as may be covered by a Revenue calculated on the actual average
Receipts of the lasttwo
two years. I have in my despatch No. 50
explained the causes of the heavy expenditure of the past, I
have also informed you that the outlay on public works during
the present Year has been reduced to the lowest limit. The only
manner in which I could carry out the instructions I have received
would be in the reduction of the Civil List.
two years. I have in my despatch No. 50
explained the causes of the heavy expenditure of the past, I
have also informed you that the outlay on public works during
the present Year has been reduced to the lowest limit. The only
manner in which I could carry out the instructions I have received
would be in the reduction of the Civil List.
2. During the past nine months I have made reductionsunder
under
this head amounting to nearly £8,000 and I am of opinion that
considerable reductions may still be made without impairing the
efficiency of the Public Service, but before doing so I should
wish to receive instructions as the Chief Appointments I propose
to abolish are held by Gentlemen appointed by the Secretary of
State. I mean the Treasurer, the Post Master General and the
Harbour Master.
3. I
under
this head amounting to nearly £8,000 and I am of opinion that
considerable reductions may still be made without impairing the
efficiency of the Public Service, but before doing so I should
wish to receive instructions as the Chief Appointments I propose
to abolish are held by Gentlemen appointed by the Secretary of
State. I mean the Treasurer, the Post Master General and the
Harbour Master.
3. I propose to abolish the Treasury Department, increasing
the Staff of the Collector of Customs by one Clerk and entailing
upon the Head of that Department the light duties now performed
by the Treasurer.
The Postal Service of the Colony in no way justifies the
appointment of a Post Master General. The Registrar General is
perfectly capable of undertaking the supervisionof
of the Postal
Department without any extra assistance or remuneration. The
appointment of a Harbour Master for British Columbia is one that
could hardly have been suggested by any one conversant with the
Colony. The duties—if any—should be performed by the Chief
Revenue Officer.
of the Postal
Department without any extra assistance or remuneration. The
appointment of a Harbour Master for British Columbia is one that
could hardly have been suggested by any one conversant with the
Colony. The duties—if any—should be performed by the Chief
Revenue Officer.
4. I may add that should you direct me to make these reductions
there is no possible opening forthe
the employment of these gentlemen
in this Colony.
the employment of these gentlemen
in this Colony.
Minutes by CO staff
Lord Carnarvon
I do not know that I can bring the question better before you than by annexing a copy of a private letter from me to Sir F. Rogers and of his answer.
I do not know that I can bring the question better before you than by annexing a copy of a private letter from me to Sir F. Rogers and of his answer.
As Mr Seymour is going back immediately, you will
probably think it better to reserve the reductions for him
as Sir F. Rogers suggests.
The Rule of the Treasury at home in
cases of abolition
is very simple. If a man has served 10 years he has earned
a pension. If he has served less they give him a gratuity
equal to one month for each year of service.
cases of abolition
is very simple. If a man has served 10 years he has earned
a pension. If he has served less they give him a gratuity
equal to one month for each year of service.
I am not in the least surprised to hear that both
Governor Seymour and Mr Birch should wish to be rid of Mr
Franks. He gave some proofs of intolerable presumption when
he went out, and I have never heard a good word of him from
any one really in contact with him. But like most undeserving
people, he is precisely the man who would pour in the
greatest number of letters in his favor from persons in too
high station really to know him.
Shall we send a copy of this despatch to Mr Seymour
officially and tell him that he is fully authorized when
he returns to the Colony to make any reductions which appear
to be demanded by the financial state of the Colony and
consistent with the efficiency of the public service?
TFE
3 Septr
As regards Mr
Franks who seems to be a ceaseless cause of
annoyance to every stage of B. Columbian Affairs I do not
now anticipate much difficulty. Mr Seymour is going out prepared
to deal with the case & I have distinctly said to him that it
must not be treated so as to give Mr
Franks a title to further
Colonial Employment, to wh from all I have heard I do not
think he has any claim.
I think that Mr Seymour understands that he has virtually
all or nearly all the power proposed to be given to him by Mr
Elliot, but it will be well to put it in writing as suggested.
Let me see the dft.
C
3 Sep
Mr Blackwood
Draft may be prepared in terms of concluding part of my Minute, as a despatch for Ld Carnarvon's signature. Please send me the draft this afternoon.
Draft may be prepared in terms of concluding part of my Minute, as a despatch for Ld Carnarvon's signature. Please send me the draft this afternoon.
TFE
3/9
Lord Carnarvon
Governor Seymour starts on Monday. He has been with me today and says that the enclosed letter will hardly give so much support as he had hoped for in making his reductions. Instead of being authorized to "propose the reductions for sanction" he wishes to be authorized to "effect the reductions subject to sanction." I own that I think that this would be preferable, if you should see
no objection.
Governor Seymour starts on Monday. He has been with me today and says that the enclosed letter will hardly give so much support as he had hoped for in making his reductions. Instead of being authorized to "propose the reductions for sanction" he wishes to be authorized to "effect the reductions subject to sanction." I own that I think that this would be preferable, if you should see
no objection.
But I remember while I am writing that there will not be
time to let Mr Seymour have the altered letter, in case you
approve it, unless we send you a copy for signature today. I
therefore annex one, and if you should not approve, we can
send him back the one already signed by you.
TFE
13 Septr
I agree.
C
14 Sep
Other documents included in the file
British Columbia finance is embarrassed. We have enjoined the
Governor to practise every economy. He here distinctly reports that
three Offices are superfluous, and I believe him to be right.
The public interest
therefore requires that these Offices
should be abolished. Do you think that the personal interest
of the holders of them ought to constitute a sufficient
objection, and that the Offices should be maintained for
the interest of their holders and against that of the public?
As the present case would be one of rather a general nature,
I trouble you with the question.
I am too much pressed to
put it otherwise than in plain terms.
therefore requires that these Offices
should be abolished. Do you think that the personal interest
of the holders of them ought to constitute a sufficient
objection, and that the Offices should be maintained for
the interest of their holders and against that of the public?
As the present case would be one of rather a general nature,
I trouble you with the question.
I am too much pressed to
put it otherwise than in plain terms.
Is not the real answer to 8290 B.C. that questions of
administrative reform must wait the arrival of Seymour, &
the annexation of V.C. Island.
I know that before Seymour's departure he & Blackwood
settled an establishment together in wh Seymour took
credit
for providing for everybody except Franks.
for providing for everybody except Franks.
I do not myself remember any case when Officers, in
Crown Colonies, have been simply turned adrift, on an
abolition of Office—but then my remembrance does not embrace much.
I imagine that a case of abolition (barring special
circumstances wh constituted notice of impermanency)
wd be dealt with much as in England. Could not the
Treasury help as to a principle when the question really arises.
wd be dealt with much as in England. Could not the
Treasury help as to a principle when the question really arises.
I feel a suspicion of this scheme from the fact that
Seymour &Birch both hate Franks (I dare say with reason)
& wd gladly throw him back in our hands here. I think
they shd caution rather to make him resign—or dismiss
him regularly pro
criminilus or give him quite a bonus
by way of compensation for loss of office as shd furnish
us with an answer to any claim for reemployment.
criminilus or give him quite a bonus
by way of compensation for loss of office as shd furnish
us with an answer to any claim for reemployment.
Other documents included in the file
Statement showing the proposed three reductions in the civil
service, listing present salary, date of appointment and who
made the appointment, prepared by colonial office staff.