MINUTES.
?T. ACA.
? Yes.
میکنم
Brin
10/1/22
++
cather stingy
I cannot help freting that
10 came
Li E. Stubbs
about ti
-
audit staff- & that
not the best place for
plunginare/
In para 21 of
it :
mention is
вало
the neuronal
of the
exchange allowance planted sucially
to at the live in the wom
of living which it
6-0
antrefated
wd result from the fall of bin Wollar.
13/1/22
DEA
AEC
16.1
I find it difficult to under-
stand the attitude which has been
adopted and persisted in by Sir R.Stubbs on this question. In
his despatch of the 11th December
1919
MINUTES NOT TO BE WRITTEN
ON THIS SIDE.
293
1919 (6174/2) he suggested (pera- graph 23) that y views should be
ascertained before the revised
salaries of the Auditor and the
Assistant Auditors were finally
こ
settled and he stated that he
thuight Mat the salary for the fur-
mer should be in the neighbourhood
of £1000 and those of the Assistent s
in proportion. Tedes_atch was
referred to me and, after : csaful
perusal of the correspondence, I suggested that the salary of the
Auditor should be on the scale
£1000 by £50 annually to £1200 und
of the Assistant Auditors £600 by
£50 annually to £900. This sur- gestion was sent to Sir E.Stubbs
with the comment that if he recum-
mended these scales the Secretery
of State was prepared to approve
them. To this he merely replied
that he considered that the salaries
proposed in paragraph of his despatch of the 26th August 1920 (51557/20) were adequate, these proposed rates being £900 by £25 annually to £1000 for the Auditor and £620 by £20 annually to £800 for
the Assistant Auditurs. On this latter paper I miruted that I was still of the opinion that the Auditor should, at least, be placed on the Cadet Service Class II scale,
and
Page 300Page 301
: