based
on
his aggregate
solely
Dervice
on his Hong-Kong service, without reference to the Honduras
service. In paragraph 2 of the present Despatch, the Hong. Konf
fort
seems to repudiate any liability
to increased pension on account of the Early Honduras Service.
During the 3 years in
which I have had to attend to pension cases, there have been buch 2 Hong-Kong precedents to which I can point.
Mr Forth, Colonial Treasurer at Hong-Kong, had his office abolishin He had previously been in the service of Tasmania and President of the Turks Ilands. These services were, however, not continuous, and the Intercolonial Pension Scheme was apparently not applied in his case.
Mr Rennie, having served in the Falkland Islands, and having
at
of the Legation
+
205
fe in China and Japan, had his Office
of Auditor feneral at Hong Kong abolished. In this case the Hong-Kong fort applied 2012 171 the Intercolonial Pension scheme, and M. Rennie thers got the benefit, at the
18
2971
Expense of Hong Kong. from his previous
service in the Falkland Islando.
The application of the Intercolonial Pension scheme, in the
shape in which it existed when dr Rennie's case was
case was decided, has been abandoned, although it is intended, I believe, to introduce a modification of it into the proposed model Pension Ordinance. It is for decision whether the Hong. Korg foot should be required to apply it, in any to Mr. Ball's case.
In
amy degres, Considering this question it may not be irrelevant
as the scheme is of
to remark that, such recent date, and is in fact not
in
force at the present onoment, Mr Ball has no claim of right to the benefit of it, and further, that if the Retiring Allowance proposed by