V
( 2 )
311
!
1
the Auditor dated the 31st August 1921 which was sent to them
under flying seal for perusal by the Governor. This memorial,
which I consider is well justified, presumably results from
my letter.
In my opinion the memorial contains cogent argu-
ments which deserve the fullest consideration but, notwith-
standing this, the Governor, in transmitting it to the Secret-
ary of State merely states that he adheres to his previous views refraint from offering any observations in refutation
of those arguments.
شبه
My considered opinion is that, having regard to the
relative value of the services rendered to the Colony by the
Auditor and the Assistant Auditors, as compared with the value
of the services of the officers of the Cadet Service, their
salaries should, in equity, be, respectively, on the scales which have been assigned to Class II and Class III Cadet Officers, those scales, as provided in the Estimates for 1921, being £950 by £50 annually to £1200 and £650 by £50 annually to £900, which are, approximately, the scales which I sug- gested in the first instance. The arguments which are con- tained in paragraphs 3, 3 and 10 of this memorial seem to justify my opinion, particularly so far as the Auditor is concerned, and, in the absence of any good reasons to the contrary, I consider that, not only as regards their salaries but also on account of other privileges, including their rela- tive status and precedence, the arguments are in favour of placing the Auditor and the Assistant Auditors in a corres- ponding position to the nearest appropriate Class in the Cadet Service. I observe that in the Straits Settlements
(Estimates 1921) the Auditor a Cadet Officer presumably
is placed in Class I Grade B, while in the Federated Malay also a Cadet Officer States (Estimates 1920) the Auditor
-
tc
is placed in Class II,
It