133
Enclosure in No. 59.
CLAUSES proposed to be added to Section 4 of the Regulations made under *The Pensions Ordinance, 1887."
Add to Section 4 (2) :
--
Provided always that, in the case of all Officers of Government appointed to, or brought on, the pensionable Establishment on or after the 1st January, 1902, only salary or personal allowance equivalent to salary, will be reckoned as emoluments for pension purposes, and that thereafter neither the value of, nor allowances for, quarters, uniform, rations nor any other such value or allowance will be counted towards pension. This provision will apply to Officers already on the pensionable Establishment, appointed on or after the 1st January, 1902, to an office in connection with which any such allowances are drawn or made. It also applies to any new allowances granted from or after the same date.
(3) Officers on the pensionable Establishment, already in receipt of such allow- ances will not be allowed to count them towards pension in cases where, on or after the 1st January, 1902, they have received pensionable increases of salary equal to or greater than such allowances either by promotion or under Schemes for periodic increments, or under Schemes or arrangements by which increments are given to the pensionable emoluments of classes or individuals. In cases where the total increment on retirement is less than such allowances, the latter will be proportionally reduced in calculating any pension due.
.
(4)-No officer whatever, appointed on a Sterling basis, shall have any claim to pension except as regards salary or personal allowance equivalent to salary.
16161
No. 61.
STRAITS SETTLEMENTS.
MR. CHAMBERLAIN to GOVERNOR SIR F. A. SWETTENHAM.
(No. 115.)
[Answered by No. 77.]
SIR,
Downing Street, May 2, 1902. I HAVE the honour to forward for your consideration and report a copy of a letter from Mr. S. M. Gregory, applying for the grant of "local pay."
2. Paragraph 10 of my despatch, No. 243, of the 2nd August last, † left it uncer- tain whether this allowance was to be drawn by officers on leave; and I regret to notice that paragraph 13 of your despatch, No. 369, of the 28th August, in which the question was asked by implication, did not receive a definite reply on this point.
3. I shall be glad to learn whether or not you consider that it would be the better course to allow this non-pensionable addition to an officer's pay to be drawn by him while on leave.
4. I have to request that you will at the same time inform me what payment, in either case, should be made to Mr. Gregory, who appears to be entitled to the
addition.
18659
I have, &c.,
J. CHAMBERLAIN.
No. 62.
16161
No. 60.
STRAITS SETTLEMENTS.
MR. S. M. GREGORY to COLONIAL OFFICE.
(Received April 26, 1902.)
[Answered by 16161: not printed.]
SIR,
Grand Hotel du Louvre, Paris, le 24 April, 1902. I HAVE the honour to submit that I have recently seen in the Perak Govern- ment Gazette of 25th October last, a despatch of the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, dated 2nd August, 1901, paragraph 10, which says that the Secretary of State is prepared to allow an increase of 25 per cent. to the salaries of a few officers in the higher ranks of the Service, who have been disallowed the exchange compensation; such increase to date from 1st January, 1901.
I beg to request that you may be pleased to read the above paragraph together with paragraph 3 of your letter, No. 24636/1901, of 2nd August last,f written to me, which seems to bear upon the same subject.
I would most respectfully beg to submit that I still hope that the broader principle in the granting of the exchange compensation allowance, which the Secretary of State has gracionsly allowed in the cases of certain officers in the higher ranks, may still be found applicable to me. To be in charge of a branch Department in the Service, to have officers under me drawing the exchange compensation, to be subject to the ill effects of the depreciated dollar equally as much as any officer, and yet not to draw the compensation allowance, seems very difficult to me. If, however, there is absolutely no precedent which may be in my favour, then I would beg to ask whether the paragraph quoted above may be taken as applicable to me, and whether I may draw the 25 per cent. in England from 1st January, 1901.
• No. 24
I have, &c.,
S. M. GREGORY,
Accountant and Auditor,
Perak State Railways,
(on leave).
↑ Not printed.
STRAITS: FEDERATED MALAY STATES.
GOVERNOR SIR F. A. SWETTENHAM to MR. CHAMBERLAIN.
(Received May 12, 1902.)
[Answered by No. 63.]
(No. 136.) SIR,
I HAVE the honour to enclose copy of a letter from the Resident-General,§ covering a memorial§ (also enclosed) from Mr. Burn-Murdoch, Chief Forest Officer in this Colony and the Federated Malay States, urging that his salary of £750 a year should be paid to him at the current rate of exchange, on the ground that he was not told, when engaged by you, that he would be paid at any special rate of exchange. As an alternative, Mr. Burn-Murdoch asks that his sterling salary should be paid in London, or that he should receive $500 a month with double compensation..
Government House, Singapore, April 15, 1902.
2. I referred this case to the Executive Council some time ago, and they advised me that it must be governed by the rule laid down in your despatch, No. 243, of 2nd August last,† paragraph 6, and Mr. Burn-Murdoch was so informed. >>
3. I confess, however, that it appears to me that Mr. Burn-Murdoch, and every other officer who has been appointed on a sterling salary without the special condition as to exchange, must be paid at the current rate. It will be remembered that when I first suggested sterling salaries, I recommended that they should be paid at a rate of exchange to be settled monthly as is now done with compensation. It was, how- ever, decided by you that the other plan should be adopted, and ever since my arrival here I have so laid it down. It is to be regretted that a certain number of officers have within the last twelve months been engaged by the Federated Malay States on sterling salaries whilst this condition has been omitted from the terms of engagement. It is also unfortunate that owing to a new and serious fall in the value of silver, the dollar is only worth 1s. 8d. to-day, while the average exchange for last year works out to 2s. 04d. This, of course, means a loss of 34d. on every dollar, thus carly in the year, and the difference appears likely to grow greater.
4. I cannot recommend that either of Mr. Burn-Murdoch's alternatives should be accepted, but I think that he, and others in a like position. are entitled to receive their salaries at the average rate for the previous month, following exactly the practice hitherto pursued in the case of exchange compensation.
• No. 60.
† No. 24.
No. 33.
§ Not printed.
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference:-
TETIC.O. 882
6
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO