Colonial Despatches

Sir. F. Rogers
I think as the £141.1.3 has been remitted for payment to the War Office it ought to be paid to them.

I would send this to the Governor stating that if no funds should arrive in the Country before the 1st of April it was Ld G's intention to apply to the Treasury on this occasion for their authority to sanction this advance from the General funds in the hands of the Agent General, in order to save the credit of the Colony. That it was not impossible that their Lps might refuse to sanction such an advance on the present occasion and that it would not be in his power to recommend it on any future occasion. That it was also necessary to take steps for keeping faith with the Creditors of the Colony in respect to the investments of the Sinking Fund, with respect to which Mr Seymour has not even thought it necessary to make any proposal short of paying the whole. [Marginal note:]
Due to Sinking Fund

BC—
up to Jan 1 1869 incl.	5373
April	1126
Do V.C.I.—
Jan 1 69	[cut off microfilm]
July /69	[cut off microfilm]
	[cut off microfilm]

That it is Lord Granvilles intention during the ensuing 1/2 year to appropriate [blank]£ of the remittances from British Columbia to investment in the Sinking fund, even though the consequence should be that it will become impossible to pay the interest on the debres wh will become due on the 1st of Octr. That it is for the Govr of BC to provide against this contingency wh it need scarcely be observed will be destructive to their credit.

At once.

Direct C.A. to pay this small claim stating that they will hear further on the General subject of their Letter; then, return these papers to me—with any others that will enable me to fill up the blank above.

Sir F. Rogers
There is some difficulty in filling up the lacuna in your Minute with the exact sum required. ? May we not say that Lord G. intends to "appropriate out of the remittances from B.C. whatever sum is required to meet the past and accruing charges on account of the investments in the Sinking Fund &c."

Sir F. Sandford
I did not intend to have been so merciless—but to have appropriated enough to cover the accruing half yearly payment & a certain proportion (arbitrarily chosen) of the arrears.

	The arrears amount to—	£
	B.C. Sinking Fund	5,375
	V.I.    "      "	800
		6,175
	The payments falling due in the 1/2 year are—	£
	B.C. Sinking Fund 1 April	1,125
	1 July	2,250
	"   "	1,000
	V.I.    "     "  15 July	800
		5,175
	B.C. Interest     1 April	3,000
	1 July	3,000
	V.I. Interest     15 July	1,200
		7,200
		£
i.e. =	S. Fund Arrears	6,175	) in all will
	Sinking Fund	5,175	) be required
	Interest	7,200	) before October
		£18,550

I understand that given reference to the Treasury will cover the April interest—(£3000).

But then £4,200 will be due under this head in July. We say nothing of this, & writing in March we may threaten as to October, but hardly as to July.

? Write that It is Lord Granvilles intention during the ensuing 1/2 year to provide for the payment of the interest falling due in that period, out of the remittances from B.C., & to appropriate the whole of the remainder of these remittances to meeting the past & accruing charges on account of investments in the sinking fund, &c.

It appears hopeless to expect that they will remit £18,550 before October & what will then be due.

Sir F.S.

What do you say to this?

It is Ld G's intention to apply the remittances hereafter recd as follows—first to the replacing of any balance agst the Colony in the Agents accounts, next to the payment of the July interest (4200£?), thirdly to the extent of 8000£ to the sinking fund, and not until that sum has been paid, to the payment of the dividends of Oct. 1869 and that he will expect remittances after that time sufficient at least to pay the interest and full amount of sinking fund (before 1 April next? or the end of the year?) or as rapidly as the revenue of the Colony will admit of & certainly so as to place that fund in its proper position before the April dividends are paid?

Draft at once.

Mr Cox
I sent on a Draft referring this despatch to Treasy for concurrence. That Dft has not been returned—am I to conclude that Treasy concurrence is not required?

Sir F. Sandford
No concurrence needed I think—but send a copy for information?

Sketch was torn up by Sir F. Rogers as unnecessary.

See subsequent Agents 4029 April 10, 69.

Draft reply, Granville to Seymour, No. 23, 13 April 1869, with extensive minutes and revisions.

Sandford to Crown Agents, 16 April 1869, forwarding copy of despatch to Seymour as noted above for information.

Ledger sheet, no signature, no date, bearing figures relating to British Columbia debts.