Murdoch to Rogers (Permanent Under-Secretary)

I have to request that the enclosed amended Draft Reconveyance of
Vancouvers Island from the Hudsons Bay Co to the Crown may be
substituted for the Draft which accompanied my Report of the 20th
March last. The substitution is required under the following
circumstances.

2. It may be remembered that at a discussion of this matter which
took place at a personal interview with you in August last, it was
doubted whether the Draft taken in conjunction with its
accompanying map, prepared by the Company, of the Victoria District
(Lot 24 Sec 18) might not possibly be held to operate as a
confirmation of Title to the Lands sold by the company previous to
the 1st January 1862. If so this would be going beyond the
intention of the Agreement of 3rd of Febry 1862 which simply
declared that all such previous sales should be valid as against
the Crown.

3. By the original Draft it is proposed that all the Island should
be reconveyed to the Crown except (among other things not now in
question) such portion of the Victoria District (Lot 24 Sec 18) as
is coloured Pink and marked with the letters H.B.C. But the Lots
so coloured and marked include not only the Lands in that district
to be retained by the Company but all Lands purported to be sold by
them before the 1st January 1862. It was thought advisable not to
attempt to delineate the sold Lands on the plan which was to be
attached to the reconveyance, as this might hereafter involve the
Crown in questions respecting the validity of the sales & the
accuracy of the meter and bounds of the different Lots—but only to
delineate on it the Lots reconveyed to the Crown and those in the
actual possession of the Company. It became necessary, therefore,
to recast the description of the parcels in the original Draft and
to bring it to as close an accordance with the provisions of the
Agreement of Febry 1862, as the existing state of facts will allow.

4. As Mr Maynard the Solicitor of the Company had unofficially
seen and approved of the original Draft on the part of the Company,
it was considered right to allow him in like manner to see the
amended Draft. We accordingly sent it to him unofficially in
August last, and it has now been returned to us, with the
 accompanying letter from Mr Dallas, stating that Mr Maynard sees
no objection to the alterations. These alterations which, as I
have stated, affect only the parcels are shown in red ink in the
enclosed amended Draft.

5. The Map of the Victoria District which accompanied the Original
Draft has not been altered to correspond with the amended Draft,
but in its present shape it may still assist the Colonial
Authorities who will of course take care, when preparing the plan
of the Victoria District which is to be endorsed on the Deed, to
follow the description contained in the amended Draft, which they
will also take care to make correct, and to distinguish in detail
in the plan only the Lots reconveyed to the Crown and those in the
actual possession of the Company, shading each with a different
colour, and denoting them respectively with the corresponding
numbers and letters in the Draft.

6. Should Mr Cardwell see no objection to the Draft Reconveyance
in its amended shape, I presume it will be dealt with as suggested
in my Report of the 20th March last.