I have to acknowledge your letter of
8th inst, with a
despatch from the Governor of
B. Columbia on the subject of certain
land in dispute between the Government of the Colony and the Hudsons
Bay C
o.
2. This land consists of two lots—one known as lot Z, the
other a small portion of the
Beacon Hill Park. In respect to lot Z,
although the Governor treats it as still open to consideration, the
question is in fact closed. Upon this point I
would beg to
refer to my report of
18th Decr 1866—and your answer of
2nd
Janry last. In respect to the portion of
Beacon Hill Park, it
will be remembered that the land had been cut off from the Park by an
error in running the boundary and had been sold by the Hudsons Bay
C
o. I submitted that under these circumstances the price obtained
for this land, which was said to be $1700, ought to be repaid by the
Hudsons Bay C
o to the public. This suggestion was approved by the
Earl of Carnarvon and accepted by the Hudsons Bay C
o who only
stipulated that the amount to be repaid, not exceeding
$1700, should
be determined by us. The Governor was in consequence requested to
furnish the necessary information to enable us to settle the
claim—and he does so in his despatch of the
24 Septr.
3. He states that the extent of land cut off from the Park was
5 1/4 Acres of an average value of $400 an Acre—but that the claim
of the Colony would be fairly satisfied by a payment of $1700. The
way in which he arrives at this result is explained in the letters
from the Colonial Secretary and the Acting Surveyor General which
accompany his despatch. The actual price of the land at $400 an
acre would of course be $2100 but it is
proposed to deduct from that
sum $400 for a narrow strip of land marked on a sketch which
accompanies the Surveyor General's letter, which it is desired to add
to the Park. As this seemed a fair arrangement we proposed it to
the Hudsons Bay C
o and they informed us in answer that they accept
it, and that the necessary instructions will be sent to their Agent
by the next mail. To prevent the possibility of mistake I enclose a
copy of the letter which we addressed to them on the subject and of
their answer, which I would submit should be communicated to
the
Governor.
4. I infer from the Governor's despatch that he has not been
informed of the decision of the
Earl of Carnarvon in regard to lot
Z. If so I presume that the present opportunity would be taken
for explaining that decision to him.
Minutes by CO staff
Sir F. Rogers
In a despatch dated
26 Oct 1866 the
Govr of
Vancouver Island
called attention to three points arising out of the reconveyance of
that Island to the Crown by the Hudson Bay
Cy.
.off 1. the sale of a portion of
Beacon Hill Park.
.off 2. Sale of a portion of the foreshore on the South side of
James
Bay.
.off 3. Sale of the herein mentioned lot Z.
.off end
As regards the 1
st the land on
Beacon Hill the L & E Com
rs,
to whom the Gov
rs despatch was referred, recommended that the
Company should be requested to refund the amount they
recd
for the Land.
2
nd as regards the foreshore sale they were of opinion
that the sale could not be contested,
as recommended by the
Committee of Board of Officers in the Island.
3
rd as regards lot Z the Comm
rs were also of opinion that
the sale by the
Cy could not be contested, & they therefore
recommended that the money to be
recd from the
Cy for
Beacon
Hill should be spent in purchasing lot Z.
Lord Carnarvon concurred & instructed the Com
rs to communicate
with the
Cy accordingly.
The
Cy consented to refund for
Beacon Hill, but as the
Com
rs had not sufficient information to enable them to fix the
amount, a further reference was made to the Colony.
That information has been supplied the
Cy have consented to
pay back $1700
& have instructed their Agent in the Colony to make
that payment.
On this point it is only necessary to inform the Govr in
answer to his despatch 10835 what has been done.
In his despatch the Govr called attention to the question of
lot Z, as regards which he had recd no instructions. He must
therefore be informed that there is no claim agt the Cy for this
sale—but it is also necessary to consider & decide what instructions
should be given for its repurchase.
As to the foreshore sale I suppose the Govr must also be told
that the sale by the Cy was a valid one.
I should like to see
Mr Cardwell's dphes N
o 39,
14 Aug 65
and N
o 16 of
26 April 1866—
wh I think must deal with Lot Z and
the foreshore.
I send you the two despatches you asked for—that of
14 Aug 1865
deals with lot Z as shown in the Com
rs Report 11971—by saying that
the sale could not be impeached. The B
d of Officers appeal ag
t
the decision—& it is on that appeal that
Govr Seymour says he has
recd no instructions. The Gov.
shd therefore I think be told
the question has been already decided & cannot be reopened.
Mr Adderley
Enclose
EC's report from
wh the
Govr will learn that the HBC
have given orders to pay 1700$ to the Colonial
Govt for the Land
sold in error and to reconvey the small strip of land referred to by
the E.C. State that
Mr Cardwell's decision respecting lot Z conveyed
in his dph of
14 Aug must be adhered to.
That the
Govr will have already perceived
from HGs dph N
o 23 of
11 May that HMG have not considered themselves
entitled to require any modification of the Deed of Reconveyance of
V.C.I. with the object of avoiding the sale of certain portions of
foreshore referred to in the 5
th parag of the report of certain
public officers enclosed in
Gov Kennedy's dph N
o 81 of
20 Oct. 1866.
See subsequent
L/1007/67.
Also Hudsons Bay Co/7488/68.