COMMISSIONER OF POLICE:
SUBJECT.
MEMORANDUM.
TO.
FROM.
SIR,
INSPECTOR J. SHEPHERD.
168
37
In reply to your memo dated 28/7/47 I am still at a loss to know how confusion arose regarding memoranda that you have mentioned, for, all that I am corresponding about is our Memo of 29/1/47 which by my Memo dated 21/2/47 (copy attached) is the petition that I was informed oof had been sent to the Rt. Hon. the Secretary of State.
The attached memo. is my written request and bears out that
I made no verbal request for our meno to be sent to the Secretary of State, Hence no confusion should exist or have existed. In stating this, if our Memo had been properly dealt with I fail to see why it should be confused with some other matter.
I am thankful of the reminder to Government General Order No. 53 which is the order I have fully complied with throughout, for, a perusal of all correspondence will find this to bego.
2.
I, too, very much regret that there is confusion and no matter whether it was unintentional or not does not help to solve the problem. I feel you will agree that there has been no oonfusion on my part .
મ
E
My meno was not submitted to the proper authorities and as I have already stated, excepting salaries which also entails allowances, quarters, light, fuel, medical attention and pensions and which was extracted from our petition by your Memo. of 13/2/47 and placed before the Salaries Commission - that it was requested in writing that our petition be forwarded to the Secretary of State. There is very much more than Salaries and Seniority contained in our petition.
3.
As the business conducted at the Salaries Commission was recorded both by record and shorthand, the same on being checked will be found that Mr. Sloss did not inform me that he had our Memo dated 29/1/47.
That the Commission had a copy of Mr. Secretary HALL'S letter frem me is entirely untrue, nor did I submit "the Special Memorandum", nor did Government have the right to submit my Meno to the said Commission, and I most certainly did not ventilate same.
Had the Chairman sp raised the point I would have refus ed to discuss sane, considering that while present there I had your Meno advising me that our petition had been forwarded to the Secretary of State.
I also fail to see why the Commission examined you on same and I only hope Sir, that you expressed surprise and at the same time informed the Commission that the matter had been submitted by you to Government accompanied by our request for same to be sent to the Rt Hon the Secretary of State for the Colonies.
It would seem that someone is at cross purposes here.
I am fully prepared to meet anyone to again state what I put before the Commission.
A.
your Memo.
I acknowledge with thanks the references in para. 4 of
The fact that I quoted "should I contravene Govt. General Order No. 53 disciplinary action would or could be taken against me, was that officers now serving here contravened that order and were placed on a Departmental charge. In saying so I also wished to paint out that I was conforming to Regulation, at the same time to infer or state that those who were responsible for such regulations should also abide by same.
I am informed that you have sent to the Secretary of the European Inspectors Association a letter feferring to the action taken by the Officers on leave, I have not seen this letter and trust you are not under the misapprehension that anything I have quoted has resulted from seeing that letter.
5...