CO882-6 — Page 362

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

C.O. 882

6 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

146

to his grade, on the rate of increments assigned to them in the scheme, and I shall be glad to be informed why these appointments have not been included in Class VI. of the cadet service.

8. I agree to the salaries proposed for the Judicial Commissioner, and the Malay States Guides; but I do not understand why the Medical Officer of the Regiment is not given increments; and I would suggest that unless there is any special reason to the contrary, he should be given the same rate of pay as a District Surgeon.

9. The salary suggested for the Director of Public Works seems adequate. I am inclined to think that it would be simpler, and fairer, in view of the salaries given in other departments, to reduce the five grades of executive engineers which are contemplated by the scheme to two. It appears to me, too, that it is doubtful economy to try to obtain engineers from this country at so small a salary as £300 a year, as the class of man attracted by so low initial pay is not likely to be well qualified and fit for subsequent promotion.

I would therefore suggest that the department might be graded as follows:-

tri

Minimam.

Maximum.

Triennial Increment.

£

£

£

Assistant Engineers

360

480

40

Second Grade Executive Engineers

540

660

40

Two State Engineers

First Grade Executive Engineers and two

State Engineers,

660

780

GO

780

900

60

If you accept my view I shall be glad to receive a revised classification of the department on these lines.

I will ask you, in the light of the above, to consider the case of Mr. R. Anderson, which is referred to in your despatch of 15th February,* and that of Mr. E. H. Wallich, from whom I have received the memorial of which I enclose a copy."

I do not understand why you propose to pay the Architectural Assistant so much more than is given to the holder of the same post in the Colony. To the rates sug- gested for the remaining posts in the departments I see no objection.

10. In your despatch of 20th January,† paragraph 18, you suggest that as most of the Surgeons in the Colony and the Veterinary Surgeons are to be paid £360 to £480 per annum, it may be desirable to pay the same amount to District Surgeons in the Federated Malay States. I think that the salaries of the medical department in the Federated Malay States should be assimilated as far as possible to those in the Colony; and I agree to your informing the District Surgeons that, subject to the understanding embodied in the same paragraph in regard to the right of private practice, a scale of salary at the rate of £360 to £480 per annum will be adopted instead of £360 to £420 per annum, on which latter scale you will have observed that the District Surgeons lately sent out have been appointed.

11. I am arranging, on the lines suggested by you in another despatch, in regard to the post of Director of the Institute of Medical Research; and as you will learn from the reply to that despatch, the authorities of the London School of Tropical Medicine have agreed to the appointment of Dr. Daniels, the Superintendent of the School, for a term of rather under three years.

You have already been informed of my decision that the Assistants at the Insti- tute shall be appointed on the same salary as District Surgeons.

12. As regards the Mining appointments, I have decided, with a view to obtain- ing suitable candidates for the Inspectorships, to adopt the higher rate (£300 per annum) suggested in your despatch, No. 316, of the 17th September last, with a sub- sequent increase to £330 if and when the officers are placed on the permanent estab lishment at the end of three years, and a further increment of £30 after another three years.

13. Pending the final decision as to placing the Revenue Survey under the Chief Surveyor, Federated Malay States, I agree provisionally to your proposals as regards the two Survey Departments.

• Not printed.

↑ No. 49.

147

14. I accept the salary proposed for the General Manager of the Railways, and the rates proposed for the other high posts in that department, but I have grave doubts as to whether an annual salary of £300 is enough for Assistant Engineers sent out from this country; and perhaps it would be well to place these officers on the scale which I have suggested above for Assistant Engineers in the Public Works Depart-

ment.

15. It would, I fear, be difficult to obtain foremen platelayers on the terms which you propose, viz., £180, rising to £240 per annum by two triennial increments of £30. A foreman platelayer was recently sent out, as you are aware, on a salary of £200 per annum, with £30 good-conduct pay, to rise to £210, with the same good-conduct pay, after three years, and I think that these rates must certainly not be reduced.

16. I have to refer you to my despatch, No. 71, of the 17th March last, in regard to the engagement of European engine drivers. The decision embodied in para- graph 6 of that despatch, that engine drivers should be placed on the pensionable establishment at the end of three years, if it is desired to retain their services, should, in my opinion, be applied, generally speaking, to all other railway officers, such as foremen platelayers, who are engaged in England in preference to the present system of extending agreements from time to time. It is difficult to induce men to go out without some reasonable prospect of permanent employment.

17. As to the Inspectors of Telegraphs, I would refer you to my despatch, No. 85, of the 27th of March last, from which you will have learned that a candidate has been engaged at a salary of £225 a year, in accordance with your previous suggestion.

18. I have finally to suggest that if you accept the various alterations proposed in this despatch the same procedure should be followed in regard to the publication of the amended scheme as is proposed in the case of the Colony, in paragraph 21 of my despatch of even date.t

23137

SIR,

No. 69.

I have, &c..

J. CHAMBERLAIN.

STRAITS SETTLEMENTS.

MR. CHAMBERLAIN to GOVERNOR SIR F. A. SWETTENHAM. [Answered by No. 81.]

(No. 183.)

Downing Street, June 13, 1902. WITH reference to my telegram of the 5th instant, and to your telegram of the 10th instant, § I have the honour to forward, for your information, copy of a letter § which I have caused to be addressed to Messrs. Coveney, Lesslar and Zehnder, three members of the Straits Settlements Volunteer Contingent, on the subject of their leave salary.

2. I desire to explain that the proposal contained in my telegram of the 5th instant was not intended chiefly to apply to these officers, but also to all other sub- ordinate officers who were in the Service at the date when the new rule was pro- mulgated as to subordinate officers drawing their leave pay and pension at the current rate of exchange.

3. Having regard to the scrupulous care that has been shown to respect the vested interests of the higher officers of the Service, in respect to their pay and other privileges, I am inclined to think that it would be hardly fair to apply the new rule to subordinate officers already in the Service, even though they receive increases of salary, such increases being, in most cases, of moderate amount.

4. As such officers rarely come to Europe on leave or on retirement, the expense involved would not be great, and it seems hardly worth while, for the sake of a small saving, to enforce a ruling which may cause a general feeling of discontent amongst the officers concerned.

5. For the above reasons I am still disposed to think that it would be expedient to reconsider the decision contained in the 13th paragraph of my despatch, No. 243, of the 2nd August last, and to apply the current rate of exchange for leave and

21688: not printed. § 23137: not printed. | No. 24.

• Not printed.

↑ No. 67.

12169

T1