32
contractual ri ht or uarantee to the maintenance of such
conditions. The question of the extent to which officers
It
can be held to have any definite rights in this matter is of
some importance in Hong Kong, since the Committee's proposals,
while in some directions more generous than the existing
regulations, in others would have the effect of reducing
existing privileges, although the reductions would not be of
very great moment, unless coupled with a curtailment of the
present concessions in regsra to children's passages.
must be borne in mind that when revised leave and pssasge
regulations were introduced in 1952 officers already confirmed
to the permanent zatablishment wore allowed an option between
he old and the new rules. It would be in accordance with
the view exproused by the Committee in relation to oflicera
in Lost Africa, who were permitted a similar option in 1920
or 1921, that the Hong Kong officera, who elected in 1952 to
retain the the old regulations, ahould not be compelled to
relinquish their claim to those regulations on a subsequent
revision, (although there is evidently something to be said
for ivin them a farther opportunity to come under the
now regulationa, sa revised in the light of the Committee's
recommendations, if they so desire), and it might be argued
that it is inequitable to require officers who then elected
for th new regulations, to summit without option within a
few yours to a curtailment on the privileges which they
thereby obtained. of the officers who have been esllod upon
to gocept without option the existing regulations, those who
are not confirmed could on the 1952 precedent be re uired to
socept rovised regulations without option, but those who
have been confirmed in their appointments will doubtless expect
the privilege of exercising an option, which was accordo to
officers