<persName ref="prs:hamilton_ga"><surname>Hamilton</surname>, <forename>George</forename> <forename>Alexander</forename></persName> to <persName ref="prs:rogers_f"><surname>Rogers</surname>, <forename>Frederic</forename></persName> 5 June 1862, CO 305:19, no. 5579, 559. Hamilton addressee Rogers (Permanent Under-Secretary)

Published by Jim Hendrickson and the University of Victoria.

Hamilton, George Alexander to Rogers, Frederic 5 June 1862, CO 305:19, no. 5579, 559.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/V625TE03.html. CO 305:19 CO 305 19 5579 559 V.I. 1862 received 6 June co_305_19_00564r.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.

Public Offices document. Minutes (7), Enclosures (untranscribed) (3), Other documents (1).

Hamilton forwards questions from the Treasury concerning costs related to the occupation of San Juan to Newcastle through Rogers. The Treasury is particularly concerned about the salary of a Magistrate at £250 a year. Ebden minutes that the magistrate was required I imagine for Imperial purposes and the Imperial GovtGovernment I suppose should pay for him, but I cannot find any arrangement about salary.

Hamilton, George Alexander
Treasury Chambers
Rogers, Frederic Inserted revisionDesc. Added abstract.
Hamilton to Rogers (Permanent Under-Secretary) 5579, CO 305/19, p. 559; received 6 June
Treasury Chambers
5 June 1862

With reference to your letter of the 25th April 1861, in regard to the funds from which the extra pay issued by Governor Douglas to the Royal Marines employed at San Juan Vancouvers Island is to be defrayed I am directed by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majestys Treasury to transmit herewith, for the information of the Duke of Newcastle, copy of a letter addressed to the Admiralty on the 26 December 1861, with an extractfrom from a letter from the War Department dated 7 February last, with copies of three Accounts of the Expenditure of the sums drawn for service connected with the occupation of San Juan by a Party of Royal Marines—viz Bill for £4000 for service - 9 Augt 1859 to 30 Sept 1860 " " £1800 " " 1 Octr to 31 Dec 1860 " " £3000 " " 1 Jany to 31 March 1861 ____ 6800

Including a balance of £2936-6-4 which it stated to be required for arrears of Extra Pay.

I am also to transmit copy of a letter of this days date which My Lord has addressed to the Admiralty.

His Grace will observe that a portion of the Expenditure included in these Accounts, has been incurred for Civil Service, to the extent of £491.1.11the the principal charge being for the salary of a Magistrate at £250 a year.

Their Lordships wish to be informed whether this Salary and the other Civil charges have received His Graces approval, and they would remind His Grace that no provision has been made by Parliament for any Civil Expenditure connected with the occupation of San Juan.

My Lords were under the impression until the receipt of these Accounts that the Expenditure at San Juan, for which Bills have been drawn by the Treasurer of Vancouvers Islandhad had reference only to the expenses of the Royal Marines.

As it now appears that certain expenses have been incurred unconnected with Military or Naval Service, My Lords apprehend that it will be necessary to make special provision, as well to meet the Civil Expenditure up to the present time, as to cover the expenditure to be incurred hereafter, if it is considered necessary to continue the service of the Magistrate, and other Civil Expenses.

I am Sir Your obedient Servant Geo. A. Hamilton
See separate Memo by Mr Ebden, and Minute. TFE 7/6
Mr Elliot This letter encloses accounts of the expenditure at S. Juan to the 31st of March 1861 including a civil expenditure of £497.1.11.

The Governors despatch No 18 of the 30th of March last encloses further accounts to the end of 1861 viz £4222.2 Military and Naval and £104.3.4 Civil. This despatch was ready to be sent to the Treasury but Mr Buckland mentioned that a letter was on its way from the Treasury and thought the despatch had better be delayed till our answer.

The correspondence enclosed in the Treasury letter shows that, with the exception of the civil outlay, the expenditure should be divided between the War Office and the Admiralty, the former taking barracks and the latter the Royal Marines.

The Treasury propose special provision for civil expenses and ask how far they have been approved. With the exception of two items amounting to £21.18.4 for towing and piloting certain United States vessels, the whole civil expenditure appears to have been for the salary and office expenses of the Stipendiary Magistrate from his appointment in July 1859 to the abolition of his office in July last. He was appointed in pursuance of the policy dictated by this office on the S. Juan question, and was continued and removed by the same authority. He was required I imagine for Imperial purposes and the Imperial GovtGovernment I suppose should pay for him, but I cannot find any arrangement about salary. However its amount viz £20.16.8 a month or £250 a year does not seem excessive and the contingencies do not appear to have been beyond what must have been necessary.

RE
Mr Fortescue It seems to me that if you agree-as I do—in Mr Ebden's remark that the Magistrate in San Juan is a proper subject of Imperial charge, his Salary must be provided for in any Estimate next year connected with B Columbia. The expense appears to have ceased. TFE 7 Jan
I quite agree. CF 9
I concur entirely. N 10
Mr Ebden Will you prepare a draft to the Treasury; apprize them that the office of Magistrate is abolished, so that there will be no further Civil expenditure, so far as the Duke of Newcastle is aware, in respect of the Isle of San Juan. State that His Grace would recommend that the amount now due should be provided for by an item upon any Estimates which it may be necessary to submit to Parliament next year in connection with British Columbia.

In this memo: I assume that there is no other civil expenditure than about the Magistrate. If I am wrong please let me know.

TFE 11 June
Rogers to Hamilton, 14 June 1862, discussing the temporary nature of the Magistrate and expressing a belief that the sum expensed did not exceed what was absolutely necessary.
This Magistrary was quite a temporary one. It was created solely on acct of the difficulty with the Americans abt the ownership of S. Juan. ABd
W.H. Stephenson, Treasury, to Secretary of the Admiralty, 26 December 1861, advising that in future the Admiralty would examine the accounts of expenditure, including extra pay, relative to Seamen and Marines serving ashore, and that the expense would be charged to Naval Funds.
Extract, War Office to Treasury, 7 February 1862, forwarding copies of accounts with respect to the marines stationed at San Juan, and advising that the only expense chargeable to Army Funds would appear to be "that for the construction and repair of Barracks."
Hamilton to Secretary to the Admiralty, 3 June 1862, further discussing the question of statements of account for marines serving ashore, and enclosing specific information dealing with the San Juan situation, with explanation.