CO885-6 — Page 366

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

PELLICO. 882

158

Enclosure in No. 81.

MINUTE BY THE COLONIAL TREASURER.

Noted (1) that all officers affected by paragraph (13) of the Secretary of State's despatch of August last will be entitled to draw pay and pension in gold countries at the privileged rates; (2) that "newly appointed officers" will draw under like circumstances at the rate adopted from time to time for the payment of sterling salaries in the Colony.

2. What date will be the dividing line? I suggest 1st August, 1901, which is the date in connection with Sterling Scheme.

3. It is a pity the Secretary of State has altered his ruling. No "general feel- ing of discontent" need have been anticipated (paragraph 4), and it is impossible to foretell the charge which this may entail on the Colony. It is hardly likely that many will not take advantage of the opportunity of obtaining double pensions, and the result may be not only great cost to the Colony but the severance from it of our best local-born servants and their families.

July 11, 1902.

F. G. P.

159

for the previous year. Even if the exchange remain steady after his first few months of service, he would still be a loser if there was no rise. The case which I have already pointed out to you cannot well be improved upon. Only last year the dollar was worth 2s., and the average value for the year 1902 was 2s. 04d. That is the rate at which Officers on sterling salaries have been paid when the actual exchange value of the dollar was about 1s. 8d. It can hardly be supposed that a man will be satisfied when he is arbitrarily told that he must lose 4d. on every 2s. of his salary. To prevent discontent, to avoid distinctions, and to comply with the manifest intentions of the Government, I therefore, recommend that sterling salaries be paid at the monthly rate of exchange which is used for the calculation of salary compensation.

4. I may remark that I noticed that quite recently in a letter from the Colonial Office, Dr. Daniels was offered a salary of £800 a year, and nothing was said about the rate of exchange. It is almost certain that when Dr. Daniels arrives in Selangor he will demand to be paid at the current rate of exchange or, perhaps, in gold.

I have, &c.,

36466

F. A. SWETTENHAM.

6

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO

29877

SIR,

No. 82.

FEDERATED MALAY STATES.

MR. CHAMBERLAIN to HIGH COMMISSIONER SIR F. A. SWETTENHAM, (No. 243.)

Downing Street, August 21, 1902.

I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch, No. 230, of the 24th of June,* on the question whether the non-pensionable addition to an officer's pay, known as “local pay," should be drawn while on leave.

2. I concur in your view that this allowance, like that of exchange compensation, should be regarded as a purely local allowance, and therefore should not be drawn by officers on leave.

3. As Mr. Gregory has now left England, I should be glad if you would cause the sum of $32.25, referred to in the third paragraph of your despatch, to be paid to him locally, and would inform him of the decision as to "local pay."

4. As regards the fourth paragraph of your despatch, I have to refer you to my despatch, No. 183, of the 13th June.†

35240

No. 83.

I have, &c.,

J. CHAMBERLAIN.

FEDERATED MALAY STATES.

HIGH COMMISSIONER SIR F. A. SWETTENHAM to MR. CHAMBERLAIN. (Received August 25, 1902.)

SIR,

(No. 270.)

[Answered by Nos. 93 and 96.]

Government House, Penang, July 29, 1902.

I HAVE the honour to acknowledge your despatch, No. 141, of 30th May, ‡ deal- ing with the Memorial of Mr. Burn-Murdoch, and I have noted the second paragraph

thereof.

2. You invite my further opinion as to the payment of sterling salaries at a rate of exchange fixed monthly, and I can only adhere to what I have already said on this subject.

3. It seems to me that paragraph 5 of the despatch under reply is not quite correct, because it is evident that if an Ollicer enters the Service at a time of falling exchange, he must, of necessity, lose on the rate which is fixed by taking an average † No. 69.

+ No. 63.

• No. 77.

No. 84.

STRAITS SETTLEMENTS,

GOVERNOR SIR F. A. SWETTENHAM to MR. CHAMBERLAIN.

(No. 323.)

SIR,

(Received September 1, 1902.)

[Answered by No. 89 and 99.]

Government House, Penang, August 1, 1902. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge your despatch, No. 181, of 13th June,* in which you give a general approval of the scheme of Sterling Salaries for the Govern- ment service of this Colony.

2. Since the receipt of your despatch under reply I have addressed to you a telegram† concerning the question of the grade at which officers now in the Service inny join the Scheme, and I have received your reply‡ which, in my opinion, must tend to make the Scheme much more attractive than it was without this assurance.

3. I note your decision that the finality of choice in coming on to the Scheme may be deferred in the case of those officers who are hereafter transferred from the Straits Settlements to the Federated Malay States or Hongkong. You have no doubt considered the point, but it is just possible that this loophole might be made use of by those who had obtained all the advantages they were likely to gain by adhering for a time to dollar salaries and then wished to join the Sterling Scheme.

4. I concur with the suggestion contained in your paragraph 3, and will have this embodied in the Rules, which will govern the Sterling Scheme.

5. As regards your paragraph 4, I have no objection to urge to the proposal that continued service on the maximum salary of one class may count towards the earning of an increment in the next higher class, where the maximum in one-class is equal to the minimum in the other. My recommendation was only intended to apply in cases where the maximum of one class is less than the minimum of the class above

it.

6. I note your instructions as regards the payment of acting salaries, and though the course you propose is not quite so simple as the one I suggested, I think there is no practical objection to it. I should, however, like to enquire what is to be done in the case of a new appointment created after the coming into force of the Sterling Scheme. It will then, I think, be necessary to allot to every such appoint- ment a dollar salary, but I cannot recommend that such newly created sterling ap- pointments should be open even on promotion to the officers who now determine to adhere to their dollar salaries. If, however, you decide otherwise it would, I imagine, be necessary to allow the officer who obtains such an appointment to continue to draw his leave pay at 4s. or 3s., and his pension at 3s. 8d. or 3s. Such a concession would, I think, be inconsistent with the policy of Sterling Salaries. I have noted the in- structions in paragraph 6.

7. With reference to the next six paragraphs of your despatch, I venture to repeat again the recommendation which I made tentatively in my despatch, No. 27,

• No. 67.

† No. 74.

No. 78.