<persName ref="prs:seymour_f"><surname>Seymour</surname>, <forename>Frederick</forename></persName> to <persName ref="prs:carnarvon"><surname>Carnarvon</surname>, </persName> 12 April 1867, CO 60:28, no. 5793, 61. Seymour addressee Carnarvon (Parliamentary Under-Secretary)

Published by Jim Hendrickson and the University of Victoria.

Seymour, Frederick to Carnarvon, 12 April 1867, CO 60:28, no. 5793, 61.The Colonial Despatches of Vancouver Island and British Columbia 1846-1871, Edition 2.6, ed. James Hendrickson and the Colonial Despatches project. Victoria, B.C.: University of Victoria. https://bcgenesis.uvic.ca/B67064.html. CO 60:28 CO 60 28 5793 61 64 B.C. 1867received 17 June co_60_28_00062r.jpg Transcribed from microfilm archives, marked up in Waterloo Script, then transformed into TEI P5 XML.

The project glossary items have xml:id attributes beginning with trm_, and we use a trm: prefix to refer to them when linking from term elements.

We link to orgs in orgs/organizations.xml using the org: prefix.

We link to places in places.xml using the plc: prefix.

We link to people in bios/*.xml using the prs: prefix.

We link to vessels in vessels/*.xml using the vsl: prefix.

We link to other documents in the collection using the cdc: prefix.

The cdt (ColDesp Document Type) prefix used on catRef/target points to a central taxonomy in the includes file.

We link to other documents in the collection using the cdc: prefix.

Despatch to London. Minutes (3), Enclosures (untranscribed) (1), Other documents (1).

Seymour forwards Ordinance No. 6. An Ordinance authorizing the sale of the Real and personal Estates of Intestates and the report of the Attorney General. Seymour explains why he did not follow the Attorney General’s advice regarding Ordinance No. 6. Holland’s minute suggests, due to the Attorney General’s report and Seymour’s despatch, asking Seymour for what reason the alteration was made in requiring the payment into the credit of the General Revenue instead of to the credit of the Accountant General and for further clarification regarding fees being taken from estate sales. Buckingham’s minute suggests notifying that an ordinance amended in these particulars shd be passed in substitution.

Seymour, Frederick Carnarvon, Added summary of draft reply. Added abstract. Inserted revisionDesc.
No. 64 5793, CO 60/28, p. 61, received 17 June 12th April 1867 My Lord,

I have the honor to forward an Authenticated and two plain Copies of an Ordinance of the recent Session of the Legislature of this Colony, entitled; No. 6. An Ordinanceauthorizing authorizing the sale of the Real and personal Estates of Intestates.

2. I append the report of the Attorney General. I regret to see that he considers the ordinance to be highly objectionable. Had I been aware of this, in time, I should have returned the bill to the Council for amendment. I may however mention that the great majority of Members were in favour of the measure as it nowstands. stands.

I have the honor to be, My Lord, Your most obedient, humble Servant Frederick Seymour
Mr Holland CC 17 June
Mr Elliot Ordinance authorizing Sale of Real & Personal Estates of Intestates. I do not feel any objection to the power vested in the Judge to sell &c the "personal" as well as "real" estate upon good cause being shewn that such sale &c would be advantageous to the Estate. Any defect in the working can readily be amended.

As to the objection of the Attorney General to the alteration made by sec. 3 it appears to me that the Court would still retain power over the fund. The monies are to be paid into Court, & to be transferred under the orders of the Court (sec. 2) and under these circumstances I can hardly doubt but that the order of the Court must be obeyed in whatever name the monies stand.

But as the Attorney General objects, and as no reason has been assigned for departing from what appears to me to be the more correct mode of keeping the account, viz paying the monies to the credit of the Accountant General of the Court; and as another point is raised as to the section about fees, I would suggest that the GovrGovernor should be informed that looking to the objections raised by the Attorney General, and to the statement that had the GovrGovernor been aware of those objections he would have returned the Bill to the Council for amendment, His Grace though approving of the main object of the Ordinance, desires before advising HM upon the Ordinance to be informed for what reason the alteration was made in requiring the payment in to the credit of the General Revenue instead of to the credit of the Accountant General; & further to be informed whether the question of the payment of fees was duly considered or simply adopted from the former Act 29 Vict No 8, as it appears to His Grace that fees upon a low scale might very properly be taken.

HTH 18/6 TFE 18/6 CBA 18/6
Yes, & suggest that an ordinance amended in these particulars shdshould be passed in substitution. B&C 25/6
H.P.P. Crease, Attorney General, to Seymour, 31 March 1867, reporting on the ordinance as per despatch.
Draft reply, Buckingham to Seymour, No. 44, 1 July 1867 asking for clarification regarding the inclusion of fees on estate sales and suggesting to Seymour that Ordinance No. 6 should be amended with the Attorney General’s suggestions.