Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T13:15:16.122Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The British Reoccupation and Colonization of the Falkland Islands, or Malvinas, 1832–1843

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 July 2014

Barry M. Gough
Get access

Extract

In December 1832 and January 1833 the British reoccupied the Falkland Islands or the Malvinas. This reassertion of British sovereignty began an uninterrupted period of control that lasted until 2 April 1982, when armed forces of the Republic of Argentina forced the surrender of the British governor and garrison at Stanley, the capital of what the British had come to call “The Falkland Islands Dependency.” The Argentine occupation ended with a surrender to British arms on 14 June 1982. These celebrated events of recent times brought forth a fundamental question, here addressed: Why did the British possess the islands in the first place? The British government's motivation for reoccupying the Falklands in 1832–33 is insufficiently explained in existing historical literature, though the legal intricacies are known. Julius Goebel the Younger, a student of international law, termed the contest for sovereignty of the islands a “struggle.” However, his work, a study in international legal history, was not based on strategic, maritime, and economic considerations and, moreover, did not probe the question of British motivation in reoccupation. V. F. Boyson's history of the islands is a valuable survey but it inadequately investigates the same theme and the precise period under consideration. Other histories of the Falklands written in English do not examine the matter of motivation in depth. Argentine sources are extensive and see the British reoccupation as illegal. They tend at the same time to recite the arguments for sovereignty over the Malvinas; and one Argentine historian has called the reoccupation “the third English invasion,” in reference to two previous occupations by the British in 1765 and 1771. The following inquiry seeks to rectify these matters and is based on British documents, particularly in-letters of Commanders-in-Chief on the South American station. These reports to the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty reveal two concerns: firstly, the infringement by Argentine and American traders and marine exploiters in territory and territorial waters traditionally claimed but not effectively occupied by the United Kingdom and, secondly, the importance of the Falklands as a base from which to safeguard the sea routes of the southern oceans.

Type
Research Article
Information
Albion , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , Summer 1990 , pp. 261 - 287
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference on British Studies 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 On Anglo-Argentine relations the fundamental work, based on Foreign Office documents, is Ferns, Henry S., Britain and Argentina in the Nineteenth Century (Oxford, 1960), pp. 224–33Google Scholar. As a subject of legal history the crisis is treated by Down, W. C., “The Occupation of the Falkland Islands” (Ph.D. diss., Cambridge University, 1926/1927)Google Scholar. The discussion about the right to possess (as opposed to my concern, the motives for possession and development) have recently been continued in The Historical Journal: see Ware, Richard, “The Case of Antonio Rivero and Sovereignty over the Falkland Islands,” 27, 4 (1984): 961–67Google Scholar; Muffty, John, “Reflexions on ‘The Case of Antonio Rivero and Sovereignty over the Falkland Islands,’” 29, 2 (1986): 427–32Google Scholar; and “Reply to Reflexions on the Case of Antonio Rivero and Sovereignty over the Falkland Islands,” 30, 3 (1987): 735–36.Google Scholar

2 Julius Goebel the Younger, The Struggle for the Falkland Islands: A Study in Legal and Diplomatic History (New Haven, 1927).Google Scholar

3 Boyson, V. F., The Falkland Islands; With Notes on the Natural History by Rupert Vallentin (Oxford, 1924).Google Scholar

4 SirAllardyce, W. L., Story of the Falkland Islands, Being an Account of their Discovery and Early History, 1500–1842 (Letchworth, Herts., 1909)Google Scholar, Johnston, T. R. St., Falkland Islands (Port Stanley, 1920)Google Scholar, Cawkell, M. B. R., Maling, D. H., and Cawkell, E. M., The Falkland Islands (London, 1960)Google Scholar, and Strange, Ian J., The Falkland Islands, (3rd ed.; Newton Abbot, 1982).Google Scholar

5 Langenheim, A. Gómez, La Tecera fnvasión Inglesa (Buenos Aires, 1934)Google Scholar. See also Fitte, Ernesto Juan, “Las Malvinas bajo la occupacion britanica,” Investigaciónes y Ensayos (Buenos Aires) 6/7 (1969): 63–87Google Scholar; and, idem, La Disputa con Gran Bretana por las islas de Atlántico Sur (Buenos Aires, 1968). Attention must be drawn to one work that admirably explains how Argentine-United States rivalry in the South Atlantic in the 1820s and 1830s invited the British intervention. Tesler, Mario, Malvinas, cómo E.E. U.U. Provocó la usurpación inglesa (Buenos Aires, 1979)Google Scholar. See also in this regard, Hoffmann, Fritz L. and Hoffmann, Olga Mingo, Sovereignty in Dispute: The Falklands/Malvinas, 1493–1982 (Boulder, Colo. and London, 1984), pp. 64–93, esp. 72–78Google Scholar. Other sources are listed conveniently in Larson, Everette E., comp., A Selective Listing of Monographs and Government Documents on the Falkland/Malvina Islands in the Library of Congress, Hispanic Focus No. 1 (Washington D.C., 1982).Google Scholar

6 Mid-Victorian “imperialism” has been much redefined, especially with a view to explaining economic preoccupations. Cf. Bodelsen, C. A., Studies in Mid-Victorian Imperialism (1924; repr. London, 1960)Google Scholar, Gallagher, John and Robinson, Ronald, “The Imperialism of Free Trade,” Economic History Review, 2nd ser., 6, 1 (1953): 1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Shaw, A. G. L., ed., Great Britain and the Colonies (London, 1970).Google Scholar

7 Island-grabbing was least objectionable. Williams, Judith Blow, British Commercial Policy and Trade Expansion, 1750–1850 (Oxford, 1972), p. 78Google Scholar. A comprehensive survey of the Atlantic islands in the Empire is provided by Alonso, Manuel Moreno, “Las islas del Atlántico Sur y el impcrialismo británico en siglo XIX,” Anuario de Estudios Americanos 40 (Sevilla, 1983): 1–45.Google Scholar

8 Tn the nineteenth century the British government considered, among others, Juan Fernández, the Galapagos, the Hawaiian Islands, and the Bonin Islands as possible whaling bases. In some cases, as in the Bonins and Galapagos, they made fragile claims to sovereignty. However, as long as the British enjoyed free access for trade and navigation they preferred not to annex territories as ports (Sir John Barrow to James Stephen, 11 February 1841, C.O. 42/482, pp. 30–31 P.R.O.). Gough, Barry M., “Specie Conveyance from the West Coast of Mexico in British Warships c. 1820–1870: An Aspect of the Pax Britannica,” The Mariner's Mirror 69, 4 (November 1983): 419–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9 In the period 1816–20 to 1838–42, British trade with Asia rose 132%; with Africa, 325%; and with Central and South America, 93%. See Imlah, Albert H., Economic Elements in the Pax Britannica: Studies in British Foreign Trade in the Nineteenth Century (Cambridge, Mass., 1958), p. 129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 See, SirWebster, Charles K., Britain and the Independence of Latin America, 2 vols. (London, 1938), introductionGoogle Scholar; Temperley, Harold W. V., The Foreign Policy of Canning; 1822–1827 (London, 1925), pp. 103–77Google Scholar, and Rippy, J. F., British Investments in Latin America (Minneapolis, 1959).Google Scholar

11 Webster, , Britain and Latin America, 1: 11.Google Scholar

12 Quoted in Perkins, Dexter, The Monroe Doctrine, 1823–26 (Cambridge, Mass., 1932), p. 154Google Scholar; see also, Bartlett, Christopher J., Great Britain and Sea Power, 1815–1853 (Oxford, 1963), p. 68.Google Scholar

13 Journal of Admiral Sir Graham Eden Hamond, 26 August 1836, HAM/126 Hamond Journal, vol. 2, p. 154, National Maritime Museum, Greenwich; also Temperley, , Canning, p. 160Google Scholar, and Hansard, Parliamentary Debates (Commons), 20 March 1848, vol. 97, pp. 778–88.Google Scholar

14 Perkins, Dexter, The United States and Latin America (Baton Rouge, La., 1961), pp. 16–17Google Scholar, and Rippy, J. F., Rivalry of the United States and Great Britain over Latin America (1808–1830) (Baltimore, 1929), pp. 303–15.Google Scholar

15 Memorandum of a conference between Polignac and Canning, 8–12 October 1823, encl. in Canning to Stuart, 9 November 1823, F.O. 146/56, P.R.O., printed in Temperley, Harold and Penson, Lillian, eds., Foundations of British Foreign Policy: Documents Old and New from Pitt to Salisbury (Cambridge, 1938), pp. 70–76.Google Scholar

16 Platt, Desmond C. M., Business Imperialism, An Inquiry based on British Experience in Latin America (1808–1830) (Baltimore, 1969), pp. 303–15.Google Scholar

17 Basaila, George, “The Voyage of the Beagle without Darwin,” The Manner's Mirror 49 (1963): 42–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar. FitzRoy's reports to the Admiralty Hydrographic Office, though somewhat modified, found their way into print in his Narrative of the Surveying Voyages of His Majesty's Ships Adventure and Beagle, between the Years 1826 and 1836. Vol. 2, Proceedings of the Second Expedition, 1831–1836, Under the Command of Captain Robert FitzRoy (London, 1839), pp. 226–81Google Scholar. An Appendix to this volume, containing some Falklands material (pp. 149–62), was published at the same time. “A Statement of Shipping Employed in the Trade of the United Kingdom, in the Year 1832,” Nautical Magazine (London, 1833), p. 515.Google Scholar

18 Lieutenant Barral in L'Emulation surveyed the Río de la Plata for France in 1830–32. Captain Charles Wilkes led the United States Exploring Expedition to the South Pacific in 1838–42. Basalla, , “Voyage of the Beagle,” p. 45Google Scholar. Also, Viola, Herman J. and Margolis, Carolyn, eds., Magnificent Voyagers: The U.S. Exploring Expedition, 1838–1842 (Washington, D.C., 1985).Google Scholar

19 Instructions to Rear-Admiral Sir Thomas Baker, 26 July 1831, Adm. 13/2, pp. 42–44. The South American station's limits, as defined in 1816, were “to the southward of the line and to the westward of the 30th meridian of west longitude.” Admiralty minute, 18 December 1816, Adm. 3/88; also, Graham, Gerald S. and Humphreys, R. A., eds., The Navy and South America, 1807–1823: Correspondence of the Commanders-in-Chief on the South American Station (London: Navy Records Society, vol. 104, 1962), p. xiiGoogle Scholar. Gough, Barry M., “Sea Power and South America: The ‘Brazils’ or South American Station of the Royal Navy, 1808–1937,” The American Neptune 50, 1 (Winter 1990): 26–34.Google Scholar

20 In 1837, commensurate with rising British interests, government established a separate Pacific command. On the Pacific station's limits, see Gough, Barry M., The Royal Navy and the Northwest Coast of North America, 1810–1914: A Study of British Maritime Ascendancy (Vancouver, 1971), p. 243.Google Scholar

21 Instructions to Rear-Admiral Sir Thomas Baker, 30 June 1831, Adm. 13/2, pp. 38–39. On the changing boundaries of the Cape, West Africa, and South American stations, see Graham, Gerald S., Great Britain in the Indian Ocean: A Study of Maritime Enterprise, 1810–1850 (Oxford, 1968), Appendix.Google Scholar

22 Edmund Fanning advertized the Falklands as a resort for Pacific traders in his celebrated book Voyages Round the World (New York, 1833), pp. 84–97, 361–64, and 416Google ScholarPubMed. He noted that wild hogs (which made excellent salt pork) could be easily hunted there; also, geese, eggs, fish, and game could provide a good stock for vessels, especially those outward bound on long Pacific voyages. As for inbound vessels, the Falklands provided a good, last place to take on additional seal skins and oil. Fanning (pp. 473–74) also noted the value of the Falklands as a base for Antarctic whaling, sealing, and exploring, as was already evidenced by James Weddell's 1822–24 reconnaissance and trading voyage. Sealers, following in the wake of the whalers, had a more direct influence on the mammal resources of the Falklands. See Clark, A. Howard, “The Antarctic Fin-Seal and Sea-Elephant Industry,” in Goode, George Brown, ed., The Fisheries and Fishery Industries of the United States (Washington, D.C., 1887), Section 5, Volume 2, part 18, no. 3, pp. 400–67Google Scholar. The American hunting of elephant seals for skins and oil dates from 1775. Busch, Briton C., The War against the Seals: A History of the North American Seal Fishery (Kingston and Montreal, 1985), p. 6.Google Scholar

23 Weddell, James, A Voyage Towards the South Pole (London, 1825) pp. 103–04.Google Scholar

24 Protest of the British chargé d'affaires, Woodbine Parish, to the Buenos Aires foreign minister, General Tomas Guido, 19 November 1829, in SirHertslet, Lewis, ed., British and Foreign State Papers (London, 1818–1942), 20: 346.Google Scholar

25 Whitington, G. T., The Falkland Islands, Compiled from Ten Years Investigation on the Subject (London, 1840), pp. 9–10.Google Scholar

26 FitzRoy, , Narrative, pp. 236–37.Google Scholar

27 Ibid., p. 238.

28 Ibid., p. 239.

29 Ibid.

30 See Peterson, Harold F., Argentina and the United Stales, 1810–1960 (New York, 1964), pp. 108–13Google Scholar, and Dickens, Paul D., “The Falkland Islands Dispute between the United States and Argentina,” Hispanic American Historical Review 9, 4 (November 1929): 471–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

31 The Duke of Wellington to Sir George Murray (Secretary of the Board of Trade and Treasurer of the Navy), 25 July 1829, in Despatches, Correspondence, and Memoranda of Field Marshal Arthur Duke of Wellington, K.G. (London, 1877), 6: 41, 48–49.Google Scholar

32 Ibid.

33 Ibid.

34 Bartlett, , Great Britain and Sea Power, p. 60Google Scholar. In regards to the Hawaiian Islands, another archipelago of advantage to British trade, the British government opposed annexation. “If Great Britain should avowedly take under Protection these [Hawaiian] Islands, or send her ships, or troops to be stationed there,” warned John Barrow of the Admiralty to Sir James Stephen at the Colonial Office on February 1841, “we should place ourselves in a Wasp's Nest, and endless disputes and squabbles would ensue, with both foreigners and natives. By occasional visits, we get all we want without much of these” (CO. 42/82, fols. 30–1). Just such a “wasp's nest” ensued in 1843, when Lord Paulet of the frigate Carysfort, sent to protect British interests and fearing French suzerainty being established, ran up the Union Jack at Honolulu. This act was disavowed by his superior, Rear-Admiral Richard Thomas, and by the Foreign Office, and eventually the British and French agreed to a “hands-off” policy. See Brookes, Jean I., International Rivalry in the Pacific Islands, 1800–1875 (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1941), pp. 125–27Google Scholar and Bradley, Harold W., The American Frontier in Hawaii, 1789–1843 (Palo Alto, Calif. 1942), pp. 426–39 and 463–65.Google Scholar

35 Barrow (Adm.) to Robert Hay (C.O.), 2 July 1829, C.O. 303/146, P.R.O., pp. 95–96.

36 de Vattel, Emerich, Law of Nations (Dublin, 1787), p. 163ff.Google Scholar

37 The best account of this is Ireland, Gordon, Boundaries, Possessions and Conflicts in South America (Cambridge, Mass., 1936; reprt. New York, 1971), pp. 256–58.Google Scholar

38 Whitington, , Falklands, p. 12Google Scholar. Ferns, Henry S., Argentina (New York, 1969). p. 258Google Scholar. Rose, J. Holland, Newton, A. P., and Benians, E. A., eds., Cambridge History of the British Empire, Volume II: The New Empire, 1783–1870 (Cambridge, 1961), p. 545.Google Scholar

39 Instructions to J. J. Onslow, 28 November 1832, copy encl. in Rear Admiral Baker to G. Elliot, 30 November 1832, Adm. 1/40; also in Cap 0, Adm. 1/1176, and in Whitington, , Falklands, pp. 12–13.Google Scholar

40 Onslow's letter of 2 January 1833, is in Annual Register, 1833, p. 374Google Scholar; also Boyson, , Falkland Islands, pp. 97–98.Google Scholar

41 Ireland, , Boundaries, Possessions and Conflicts, p. 258.Google Scholar

42 Viscount Palmerston to Don Manuel Moreno, 8 January 1834, British and Foreign State Papers (1833–1834), 22: 1384–94.Google Scholar

43 In Whitington, , Falklands, pp. 15–17.Google Scholar

44 Ibid., pp. 9–10.

45 A summary of the reports of these several voyages is contained in “Remarks upon the Present State of the Falkland Islands, by Commander W. Robinson of H.M.S. Snake, January 1835,” Adm. 1/43.

46 Cawkell, , et al., Falkland Islands, p. 44.Google Scholar

47 R. FitzRoy to Captain F. Beaufort (Hydrographer), 30 June 1837, London, copy, H. D. Letters in, F. 177, Hydrographic Department, Taunton, Somerset.

48 Whitington, , Falklands, p. 28.Google Scholar

49 Ibid., p. 29.

50 Orders from Rear-Admiral Sir Michael Seymour, Bart., [?] December 1833, quoted in Skelly, John, “The Falklands Story,” Falkland Islands Journal (1984): 4.Google Scholar

51 Lieut. Harry Smith to Rear-Admiral Seymour, 18 July 1834, Adm. 1/42.

52 Smith to Rear-Admiral Sir Graham Eden Hamond, 4 May 1835, Adm. 1/44.

53 Note by Rear-Admiral Hamond, n.d. [1835], Adm. 1/43.

54 Hamond to C. Wood (Adm.), 14 November 1836, Adm. 1/47.

55 Hamond to Wood, 9 March 1837, Adm. 1/49.

56 Hamond to Wood, 13 October 1837, Adm. Instructions for Lieutenant Robert Lowcay, H.M.S. Sparrow. 29 October 1837, Adm. 1/50.

57 Lowcay to Hamond, 19 February 1838, Adrn. 1/51, enclosing account of proceedings.

58 Hamond to Wood, 30 October 1837, Adm. 1/50.

59 Lowcay to Hamond, 4 February 1838, Adm. 1/51.

60 Lords of the Admiralty to Rear-Admiral Sir Edward Durnford King, 25 September 1840, Adm. 2/1330, pp. 92–94.

61 As did H.M.S. Sparrow, Lieutenant Lowcay, in August 1838.

62 Miller, S., “American Sealers in the Mid-Nineteenth Century,” Falkland Islands Journal (1980): 29Google Scholar. American depredations continued despite British sovereignty being clearly displayed.

63 Hamond to Wood, 20 June 1836, Adm. 1/46. Hamond complained that he had at his disposal only three ships, including his flagship, on the Atlantic side of his station.

64 Hamond Journal, 1837, HAM 127, N.M.M., pp. 267, 276. Mackinnon, , Some Account of the Falkland Islands, p. 40.Google Scholar

65 Message of the Government on the Opening of the Legislature of the Province of Buenos Aires, 31 May 1833, in British and Foreign State Papers, 20: 1153–54Google Scholar; the exchange of notes between Philip Gore, British chargé d'affairs, and Manuel Vincente de Maza, minister of foreign affairs, of January 1833, ibid., pp. 1198–99; Viscount Palmerston's reply to Don Manuel Moreno's protest, 8 January 1834, ibid., 22: 1384–94; and Message of the President in the Opening of the Legislature of the Province of Buenos Ayres, 31 December 1835, ibid., 23: 193.

66 Peters, Harold Edwin, The Foreign Debt of the Argentine Republic (Baltimore, 1934), pp. 20–21Google Scholar. Lynch, John, Argentine Dictator: Juan Manuel de Rosas, 1829–1852 (Oxford, 1981), pp. 267–68.Google Scholar

67 Moreno to Aberdeen, 18 December 1841, British and Foreign State Papers, 31: 103.Google Scholar

68 Aberdeen to Moreno, 29 December 1841, ibid., p. 1005.

69 Goebel, , Struggle for the Falkland Islands, p. 459.Google Scholar

70 Peters, , Foreign Debt of the Argentine Republic, p. 21Google Scholar. The Times, 14 April 1849, quoted in Lynch, , Argentine Dictator, pp. 289–90.Google Scholar

71 Colonial Land and Emigration Office to J. Stephen, 22 August 1840, encl. in Stephen to Barrow, 4 September 1840, Adm. 1/5500.

72 Ibid.

73 Ibid.

74 Ibid.

75 Ibid.

76 Ibid.

77 Admiralty Minute (undated), on Stephen to Barrow, 4 September 1840, ibid. The full estimates for the establishment of the Falklands colony are to be found in Parliamentary Papers, 1841, vol. 14, p. 224vGoogle Scholar. Lord Stanley, who succeeded Russell at the Colonial Office, also supported colonization. Colonization, he insisted, was necessary “to insist most positively on the validity of those [British] claims.” C.O. to F.O., 6 January 1842, F.O. 6/502, quoted in Down, , “Occupation,” p. 191.Google Scholar

78 SirHenniker-Heaton, H., “Early Settlement of the Falkland Islands” [1923], reprinted in Falkland Islands Journal (1980): 35Google Scholar. An analysis of the ethnic composition of this developing settlement may be found in Royle, Stephen, “The Falkland Islands, 1833–1876: The Establishment of a Colony,” The Geographical Journal 151, 2 (July 1985): 204–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

79 Lord John Russell to Lieutenant Governor R. C. Moody, 23 August 1841, Correspondence relative to the Falkland Islands, printed 22 June 1843, Parliamentary Papers, 1843, vol. 33, p. 160.Google Scholar

80 Ibid.

81 Ibid.

82 Moody to Stanley, 5 March 1842, ibid.

83 It would be impossible to find a better harbor of refuge, situated at the easternmost extreme of the group; the dangers are mostly apparent, the prevalent winds off the land, smooth water to work up to the anchorage, and the necessaries of life, or at least some of them may be procured” (Seeman, Berthold C., Narrative of the Voyage of H.M.S. “Herald,” 1845–1851, 2 vols. [London, 1853], 1: 23Google Scholar). However, he added (ibid.): “That the islands are invaluable to the seaman in distress is evident; that they will ever be anything more is doubtful.” In 1849 H.M.S. Rattlesnake visited Port Stanley and found a population numbering 300, including thirty pensioned soldiers working as laborers at 3s. a day. One pensioner, an Irishman, had served earlier in Tasmania and complained of his Falklands' existence: “Sure we are fretting to death to think that we have come to this in our old age after serving our king and country so long.” All complained bitterly of being “deluded at home by highly-colored reports of the productiveness of a country where grain would not ripen, and which has not yet been found capable of producing a tolerable potato” (Macgilivray, John, Narrative of the Voyage of H.M.S. Rattlesnake commanded by the late Captain Owen Stanley… 1846–50, 2 vols. [London, 1852], 2: 99–100Google Scholar).

84 Great Britain, Statutes at Large, 6 and 7 Vict. c. 13. The status bears this preamble: “Whereas divers of Her Majesty's subjects have resorted to and taken up abode at diverse places on or adjacent to the coast of the Continent of Africa and on the Falkland Islands.…” The reference to Africa is no mistake: the judicial links and naval authority, including Admiralty courts, in some cases being joined to as much as to Cape Colony and the West African station as to the South American station. On the legal particularities of this and other British attempts to establish effective jurisdictions over sparsely-settled areas, see Johnston, W. Ross, Sovereignty and Protection: A Study of British Jurisdictional Imperialism in the Late Nineteenth Century (Durham, N.C., 1973), pp. 49–52, 113.Google Scholar

85 Ninth General Report of the Colonial and Emigration Commissioners, Parliamentary Papers, 1849 [1082], vol. 22, p. 27Google Scholar. H. Merivale (CO.) to Secretary of the Admiralty, 24 November 1856, Adm. 1/5678.

86 Moody's report, 1842, CO . 78/5, P.R.O. See also, “Falklands Island Correspondence, since August 1841,” in Parliamentary Papers, 1843, vol. 33 (160)Google Scholar. Also, 23 and 24 Vict. (1860), c. 121, amending 6 and 7 Vict. c. 13.

87 “Twelfth General Report of the Colonial Land and Emigration Commissioners,” Parliamentary Papers, 1852 [1499], vol. 8, Appendix, pp. 225–31, esp. summary.Google Scholar

88 “Papers Relative to the Falkland Islands Company, Shipping, Marts, and Guano, etc.,” Parliamentary Papers, 1852 [1499], vol. 18Google Scholar, giving an excerpt of the “Twelfth Report of the Colonial Land and Emigration Commissioner”, pp. 65–67; also Appendix, ibid., p. 225. For a discussion of the Falklands as a prospective convict colony, see Snow, W. Parker, A Two Years' Cruise off Tierra del Fuego, the Falkland Islands, Patagonia and in the River Plate: A Narrative of Life in the Southern Seas, 2 vols. (London, 1857), 2: app.Google Scholar

89 Whitington, G. T., Reason for the Formation of A Convict Establishment at the Falkland Islands (London, 1845).Google Scholar

90 Whitington, G. T., Some Account of the Falkland Islands: To Which is added a Preliminary Sketch for the Formation of a Chartered Colony, to be called the Falkland Islands Company (2nd ed.; London, 1851).Google Scholar

91 “Twelfth General Report of the Colonial Land and Emigration Commissioners,” p. 66. The statistical basis for this optimism is to be found in the Appendix to the Report, pp. 225–31.

92 Quoted in Boyson, , Falkland Islands, p. 122.Google Scholar

93 Lord Melbourne to Lord Howick, 16 December 1837, Third Earl Grey Papers, Melbourne 115/1, Durham University Library, Durham, quoted in Adams, Peter, Fatal Necessity: British Intervention in New Zealand, 1830–1847 (Auckland, 1977), p. 101Google Scholar. The reluctance of the British to expand in other places is the subject of numerous studies, including Galbraith, John S., Reluctant Empire: British Policy on the South African Frontier, 1834–1854 (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1963)Google Scholar and Robinson, Ronald and Gallagher, John with Denny, Alice, Africa and the Victorians: The Official Mind of Imperialism (London, 1961).Google Scholar

94 Quoted in Morris, James, Pax Britannica: The Climax of an Empire (Harmondsworth, Middlesex, 1979), p. 429.Google Scholar

95 Hansard, Parliamentary Debates (Commons), 25 July 1848.

96 Boyson, , Falkland Island, pp. 111–12Google Scholar. “‘They ought to be called Isles of Relief,’ was Whitington's acidic opinion, but ‘official management makes them deserve to be called Isles of Misfortune.’” Ibid., quoting Fisher's Colonial Magazine (1844), 1: 608.Google Scholar

97 Darwin, John, Britain and Decolonization: The Retreat from Empire in the Post-War World (London, 1988), pp. 307–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar