Otway to Under-Secretary of State
[3685, CO 60/37, p. 203; received 2 April
]
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 UnitedStates 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
tothis 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 Magistratewas 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withdrawn at the suggestion of Governor Douglas in that year.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 theGovernor 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.
I am, Sir,
Your most obedient
humble Servant
Arthur Otway