Historical Records of New Zealand
Board of Inquiry to Governor Darling
Board of Inquiry to Governor Darling.
The Board for General Purposes, having assembled in conformity with His Excellency the Governor’s minute, dated the 8th inst., No. 25, to consider on the remuneration claimed by Mr. J. Busby, Mineral Surveyor, for services set forth in his memorial dated the 9th ultimo, and having taken into consideration the circumstances of Mr. Busby’s volunteering on the occasions alluded to (a service totally unconnected with his official duties); considering also the length of time he was employed, the great danger and personal inconvenience to which he was exposed, together with the nature of the vessel and the stores he saved, after the failure of the officers and crew of His Majesty’s ship Tees, and thus effecting the object which Government had in view, in fitting her out, the Board beg leave to recommend that Mr. Busby should receive a gratuity of three hundred pounds sterling (£300) in addition to his salary as Mineral Surveyor.
William Stewart.Alex. McLeay.Alex. McLeayH. Dumaresq.H. DumaresqW. Wemyss.Approved.—R. Darling.Wm. Lithgow.
Returning to you the enclosed letter and memorial of Mr. John Busby, I have the honor of acquainting you, in reply page 648 to your inquiry of the 13th instant, that the object of the last voyage of the brig Elizabeth-Henrietta to New Zealand was to promote the civilization of the inhabitants of that island, by supplying them with British manufactures in exchange for their flax.
I have, &c.,
F. Goulburn.Honble. Alexander McLeay, Colonial Secretary.
Endorsement in Governor Darling’s Handwriting on Back of foregoing Letter to Alex. McLeay.
Without entering into Mr. Busby’s claims, as set forth in his memorial, he certainly appears entitled to some remuneration in addition to the allowance he receives from Government while employed, and which I conclude he received in this. How could the amount be fixed? I mean on what principle.—R.D.
Note in Alexander McLeay’s Handwriting in Reply to above.
From the manner in which Mr. B. states his case, it appears to me that he looks for some percentage on the value saved, by way of salvage, but as an officer of the Govt. this cannot of course be granted to him. There is no doubt however that he is entitled or rather that he deserves to receive something beyond his pay in this case, and whatever it may be I submit that it should be by way of gratuity. In valuing the property saved Mr. B. includes an item of £1,000 as his estimate of the importance of saving the vessel and flax, independent of the actual value of both, but such an item cannot possibly be allowed. When this therefore is deducted, the actual value of the property saved by him, according to his own account, is about £16,000. Perhaps 5 per cent, on that sum would be a reasonable gratuity. £1,000 would be only 6 1/4 per cent.