CO882-6 — Page 366

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

lupimtilm TTIC.O. 882

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

6 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

154

4. As already stated in my telegraphic reply of the 10th instant* to your telegram of the 5th instant,t on the subject of the rate at which payments should be made in England to officers not entitled to exchange compensation, I see no reason to vary the terms of paragraph 13 of your despatch, No. 243, of the 2nd August last, or to pay such officers at privileged rates, and unless you disagree with me, the payment to Mr. Gregory and any similar payment should be made at the current rate of exchange.

I have, &c.,

F. A. SWETTENHAM.

28681

No. 78.

STRAITS SETTLEMENTS: HONG-KONG.

MR. CHAMBERLAIN to GOVERNOR SIR F. A. SWETTENHAM and GOVERNOR SIR H. A. BLAKE.

TELEGRAM.

1

(Sent 5.45 p.m., July 23, 1902.)

Referring to your telegram of 14 Julyg [Hong-Kong: Referring to my despatch, 171, 13 June, officers should come on sterling scheme at stage they would have reached if sterling incremental salary had been fixed at date when they were first appointed to posts now held by them.

31526

SIR,

No. 79.

FEDERATED MALAY STATES.

MR. A. E. YOUNG to COLONIAL OFFICE.

(Received August 1, 1902.)

North Road, Seaham Harbour, July 31, 1902. I HAVE the honour to forward, for your consideration, the attached copy of a letter dated 2nd April, 1902, which I addressed to the Resident General of the Federated Malay States relative to the salary of my appointment of Chief Surveyor, Federated Malay States, and also a copy of his reply, H.C. 2807/1902, dated 6th May, 1902, which has recently reached me.

2. It would appear from the Resident General's letter that this matter may be now under your consideration, and I shall be glad if you will inform me whether I am in order in addressing you directly upon it while I am on leave. I think I can show good reason for the views expressed in my letter above quoted, and also why I, as the present holder of the appointment in question, should not be satisfied with the prospects indicated in the Resident General's reply. I would respectfully suggest that the fact that I joined the Perak service 10 years ago as Chief Draftsman and Computer in the Trigonometrical Survey Department is not an argument of relevance for depreciating the value of my present appointment, and I would also point out that in no case hitherto, so far as I am aware, has the dollar value of a Federal appoint- ment been reduced below that of the original Federation scheme because of the holder being entitled to draw exchange compensation allowance,

3. If you are willing to allow me to amplify my case by direct correspondence, I. shall be glad if you will indicate the particulars on which you require further in- formation as I am of course ignorant to what extent the matter has been explained by His Excellency the High Commissioner of the Federated Malay States.

I have, &c.,

ALFRED E. YOUNG,

Chief Surveyor, Federated Malay States.

• 21688: not Įrinted.

23137: not printed.

‡ No. 24. Not printed.

§ No. 74.

| No. 68.

34430

155

No. 80.

FEDERATED MALAY STATES.

HIGH COMMISSIONER SIR F. A. SWETTENHAM to MR. CHAMBERLAIN. (Received August 18, 1902.) [Answered by No. 91.]

(No. 262.)

SIR,

Government House, Singapore, July 19, 1902. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge your despatch, No. 182, of 20th June,* covering an appeal from Mr. C. E. Wilson, Locomotive Foreman, Selangor, against the decision that he is not entitled to receive Exchange Compensation on the whole of his salary.

2. This decision was given on a Minute of the Acting Attorney-General (Mr. Kershaw), to whom a somewhat similar case was referred; I enclose a copy of the Attorney-General's Minute.

3. In my despatch, No. 99, of the 21st March last,† Mr. Wilson was included amongst those railway employés whose posts it is proposed to make pensionable, and I therefore consider that he is, by your latest ruling, entitled to double compensa- tion.

4. You are aware that from the very first I recommended that Officers on agreement should all, without exception, be excluded from the benefits of double compensation, (1) because their position as free agents to make their own terms with the Government was quite different from that of men in the permanent service, and (2) because I recognised the difficulty of granting double compensation in some cases and not in all.

5. I trust I may be excused for referring again to this matter because there is such a difference between laying down what looks like a simple rule and applying it to a large number of very different cases. It sounds easy to say that the Govern- ment can decide whether it means to permanently retain an Officer or not, and that if an agreement has been several times renewed the employé may fairly claim to be placed on the pensionable establishment. That is, of course, the employé's point of view, but, speaking for the Government, I must point out that the agreement may have been made only six months or a year, and that it is impossible to say whether the person named in it will give satisfaction or otherwise. Again, it is almost invari- ably the case that agreement holders get better terms than Officers on the permanent establishment, for the very sufficient reason that they are not serving för pension, and their services may be dispensed with on the expiry of the agreement, or even sooner. Yet, again, it often happens that when a first agreement expires it is renewed by mutual consent (probably on better terms to the person engaged), because, though the Government does not wish to permanently retain that particular person's services, it suits the Government better to keep him for a further term of years than to make a new experiment. And this may very likely occur in the case of an appointment which the Government would be ready to make pensionable if it found an entirely suitable Officer to fill it. Whilst this method suits the Government it is in no respect unfair to the agreement holder because, up till now, he has never been able to pretend that his employment was anything but temporary and non-pension- able. I may quote, out of many, one very good instance of what has hitherto been the practice, namely, that of Mr. Watkins, lately Resident Engineer of the Selangor Railway. Mr. Watkins's agreement was renewed three or four times, on each occa- sion with some advantage to him. He left the service last year, and I could not have recommended that he be placed on the pensionable establishment. Many such instances might be quoted, but I think I have said enough to show that the Govern- ment cannot give up the practice of making agreements, of renewing them, and of still incurring no obligation to reckon such service as pensionable. This must be specially apparent when dealing with the cases of engine-drivers, foremen-plate- layers and other railway subordinates.

6. If the Government is to be compelled to at once and arbitrarily declare whether every Officer on agreement is to be permanently retained or not, or even to

• No. 70,

† 15340: not printed.

12169

DI