Mr Lucas
with this read to Whigfuts
in 12715-cucutallo so
Lord Knutsfords despatch of April 1887 ( 5488/'87 )lays
down that educational officers in Hongkong ordinarily get ne full pay leave (i... no "vacation leave")but only the two months in each year during
which the school is in holiday but the masters full pay continues, but that after 6 years residential service they may, in addition to the 2 months *holiday leave" have 2 mintha "vacation leave' i... 4 months full pay
leave in all.
This rule was sometimes followed and sometimes not till C.O.
#d-
"
despatch of 28/12/1900 (39979/∞o) further laid down (1) aa regards ucational officers thereafter entering the service that these might #- lect either to be treated as ordinary (i... non-educational officers) & get 3 months vacation leave or to get full pay during school holidays occurring while they are on leave ; and (2) as regards educational officers already in the service that these should, in strict accordance with Lord Knuta- ford's ruling, after each ☀ 6 years continuous residential service get
full pay for 2 months of school holidays and 2 months vacation leave.
Mr Jones's case falls under the last named alternative,but seeme
to require special treatment.
had not been
On the occasion of his '95 leave (15009/95) he
for 6 consecutive years in residential service and was therefore not
entitled to the beneficial 2 months and did not get it;but he had 5 and a
half years in residential service. On the occasion of the leave which he now proposes to take (necessarily before the expiration of 6 years sine his last return to the colony he is again not literally entitled to the
beneficial 2 months.
He argues that he should be entitled to 2 months vacation (i...
bebeficial) leave for every 6 years of residential service, and that as
he has not yet had any of this leave and has piled up about 14 years residential service,he should now be allowed to take 2 months vacation
leave in addition to the 2 months of holiday leave.
On these facts he is clearly fogfeálly wrong.But there is the
further fact which he alleges,and which is not denied either by the
-31215-4000-6-1900
86518-8000-11.1900
Governor or by the Treasurer (both of whom must have had
the papers before them that he was led to believe in '95
that though he could not then take any part of the 2 months
vacation leave for the 5 years which he had put in it
would continue to accumulate and could be taken on some
future occasion after he had put in another years resi-
dential service. That occasion he now argues has come, not-
withstanding 0.0. despatch of December last. In this latter
contention I think he is equitably right.
Inform the Governor that in strict accordance
with Lord Knutsford's ruling as interpreted by C.O. despatch
of December last Mr Jones is not entitled to the four months,
but that as when he went on leave in '95 he seems to have
understood that in taking leave without taking vacation
leave he was not prejudicing his right at some future os-
casion to take the vacation leave which had already accrued
to him, he will as a special case be allowed now to take
2 months vacation leave in addition to the 2 months of full
pay holiday leave; and ask the Governor to report if there
are any parallel cases.
Noted
Af
2.1.T. 12 April
C.PL. 13
at mee
330
1