769
to England, something to be said in favour of his remaining here. But if he remains in the latitude of this (my judgement) he is none the better in relaxation. Illud post battling
55230.10.20
In Boulton's case, he has not obtained any permission from the Circular existing ref 1886, which does not apply to this case as it is subject to certain conditions for employment in their absence.
I doubt, therefore, that this Department has any power or right to forbid them from receiving remuneration for the work done during his leave of absence. I had thought that if I did forbid it, he would probably have the money sent to his wife and thus evade the order.
But I think the recurrence of such cases is new and suggests the need for framing a new Regulation whereby no Officer on leave of absence is permitted to accept any Employment without first obtaining the Express Sanction of the Governor and of the Secretary of State.
Rutt Nov 4 discussed with Sir R Herbert that the terms of the Existing rule do not include this case, and therefore, it is not possible to forbid Boulton from receiving payment. But a hard and fast Rule should be promulgated.
See further II can hardly. Jessel red it on 25/4 and K on 21/4/40.