Otway to Under-Secretary of State
Foreign Office
March 31, 1869
Sir,
I have laid before The
Earl of Clarendon your letter of the
17th instant, marked Confidential, and I am, in reply, to
request that you will state to
Earl Granville that there is
nothing in the correspondence of this Office to show the precise
relative positions of the Naval Commander in Chief and of the
Governor of
BritishColumbia Columbia in regard to the occupancy of the
Island of San Juan.
I am, however, to observe that, by the agreement come to by
General Scott and
Governor Douglas in
1859, the occupation
of the
Island of San Juan was to be a joint military occupation,
and the arrangements with the United States' Military Commander,
for placing the Island in the joint occupation of the
detachments of British Marines and United
States States infantry, were
undertaken by the then Admiral on the Station,
Admiral Baynes,
who issued the orders to the Officer of Marines, under which the
Officer commanding the British force has since acted, and which
were communicated by him to the United States' Commander on the
20th of March 1860.
Governor Douglas had originally proposed
that it should be a civil occupation, but
General Scott objected
to
this this on the ground that, in that case, the civil magistrate
would be under the control of the local Government of
Washington
Territory, which, for obvious reasons, would be inexpedient,
while a military force would be under the direct command of the
central Government.
It will be seen from the letter from the Colonial Office of the
19th of March 1861, that the British Civil Magistrate
was was
withdrawn at the suggestion of
Governor Douglas in that year.
Moreover, it appears from the papers laid before the Senate, of
which a copy was forwarded to you in my letter of the
6th
of July 1868, that the civil
Authorities of
Washington Territory and the district Revenue
Officers claim to exercise jurisdiction over the Island,
notwithstanding the agreement of
1859, which, although approved
by the executive,
they they do not consider legally binding on them
without the authority of an Act of Congress. Under instructions
from the State Department, the United States' military Officers
have forcibly resisted these pretensions, and, in
1867,
Brevet
Major Graves was arrested and put under heavy bonds for this
resistance to the civil Jurisdiction of the Territory.
Under these circumstances,
Lord Lord Clarendon considers that it
would not be advisable to make any change in the manner in which
the British occupancy has hitherto been carried on. The Officer
of Marines must necessarily be dependent for many purposes on
the Admiral, under whose orders he should remain, while the
Governor and the Admiral should act in concert with regard to
any political questions that may arise.
If the authority of the
Governor Governor of
British Columbia over the
Island is asserted by the British Government, the local
Government of
Washington Territory may be further encouraged to
assert their Civil Jurisdiction over it, and the agreement of
1859 be disturbed.
I am to suggest that copies of this correspondence should be
furnished for the information of the Board of Admiralty.
Minutes by CO staff
Sir F. Rogers
I send you our letter of
19 March 1861 referred & the correspondence.
It appears to me that they may be simply sent to the
Governor for his guidance observing (to prevent mistake) that
it does not seem advisable to HMG for the
reasons ment
d in the F.O. letter that the
Govr
of
BC shd exercise any jurisdiction in
San Juan.
Other documents included in the file
Rogers to Secretary to the Admiralty,
12 April 1869, forwarding
copy of correspondence regarding the governor's status
on
San Juan Island.
People in this document
Baynes, Rear Admiral Robert Lambert
Clarendon, Earl
Cox, Charles
Douglas, Sir James
Graves, Brevet Major
Leveson-Gower, Granville George
Monsell, William
Otway, Arthur
Rogers, Baron Blachford Frederic
Scott, General Winfield
Seymour, Governor Frederick
Places in this document
British Columbia
San Juan Island
Washington Territory