tost mi saw ti tedd bases ohutlite Jadd Jaw woda doldw
od assfat .ef of bowlees need med 3 Jadw to 68tover silt
mot bne med? eroted erogaq gert svad ftonuo ovltuosxt
dalw ledua I,Jost al ob odt merit moqu noiniyo na
of statereft ovad I .amoltoaut tert etzsibde įsɔnersteb
moldeoup eds no putnsed sonsbnoqeerroo eɗt [Is Jard Jaemper
.Itaqvob ert svoted hial ed
•
-araq to dqenneneq jerit end of nomoreter diiv
tads notalgo sit easiqxe of ensoqqe cons![sox¶ tuo¥ a dgerg
quoddly vino fon eotvrea sɗt mort beqeimaib od vam NAM 8
• wfw antwon Juontiw oels tud braod pried
Jadi Jaoupe" of vllsmot quonor! aft won eva I
-9708778 odd Jnoverq doldw "enoldersblanoo to redmin" end
4
:
Jnemeride VI 187^A Iltac sorot otat animoo tnoM
redo300 .308 to reddol a'yonelleox" way al of bebulis
.coltamotni ww not beteta eɗ
x
X
.oje (ovad I
jjongit .T
.ooldout toldo
.be
CONFIDENTIAL.
sir,
Enclosure II
543
CHAMBERS.
27th, December, 1911.
I have the honour to acknowledge Your Excellency's letter of the 20th.instant informing me of the decision of the
Executive Council to put ordinance No.1 of 1910 in force against me quite independently of the matter of the proposed new Appeal Court. This decision coupled with Your Excellency's previous letter which connected the decision with the opinion expressed by the
Secretary of State that my retirement was necessary to satisfy the
Foreign Office in order to facilitate the immediate establishment
of the Appeal Court, and with the former letter to Japan which
seemed to assume that I knew about my intended retirement, has
somewhat bewildered me. I gather however that the decision that I
should retire under the Ordinance on reaching the age of 60 was
come to some time ago, and I have first to express my regret that
earlier notice was not given to me. If it had been I should not
have incurred the expense of taking leave to Japan, nor of arranging
for my wife and son to come out to the East. Secondly, I have the
honour to point out that the time which has been left me to make
the necessary arrangements for obtaining employment in England is
altogether inadequate. Thirdly, I have further to point out that
by compelling me to retire on 30th. April next I shall be unable
to complete the 7 years of actual service necessary to bring me
within the benefit of the rule which would give me a pension of
£500 a year.
I venture with respect to suggest that my services
to the Colony are such as to entitle me to a little more considera-
i tion, and that at least I should be allowed to serve the full perod
of 7 gears. I think I am justified, all questions of remuneration
apart, in looking on the work of revising the laws in the light
H.E. Sir Frederick Lugard. G.C.M.G.
Governor.
of a