of 1870 and that they may have "equitable claim to be dealt with under the rules of 1869"
My March is in the position described by Me Round, I consider, and there are no others without inc...
It will be seen from 15839/78 that he at the time of his transfer wrote regarding the question of his ultimate pension but that no definite reply was given to him though he was told that when the time of his retirement came he would receive all the favourable consideration that could properly be accorded to him
aß 8/9/06 I do not take such a liberal view as Mr Browne.
There had been a warning in 1878 that alterations in the old & favourable scheme were contemplated & Mr. March went to Hong-Kong after this, - in 1879. And again in 1880 the Sect. of State observed that the Scheme had not been finally adopted. It seems to me, therefore, that he has no claim to be treated under the old Scheme, which, not having been ratified, can hardly be said to have been in force, and I should be inclined to deal with Mr March under the later Rules which we have applied in Marsh's case with a similar sentiment applied to other Officers.
I agree with Mr. Suyulhack. We must not treat two men differently, more favourably than our Cecil Smith with whom he had a prolonged controversy on their position.
It is now stated that having been refused on the ground that having been in Hong Kong & rights were deliberately withheld, the inference is that it is more due to the minute & by Kong Agreement he was not commuting his pension.
I should like to speak to him when I return.
Similar put understand this Rent out 10. I have nother for ff. until the date of Me minute.
conversant with the facts please speak & him when argue.
De return not print December is that he must not tout Mr Manch one St we n fund Run 23/10.
More formally than sin Britt, where regret after long correspondence (see further minutes on separate sheets over)
of 1870 and that they may
have
"equitable claim to be dealt with under
the rules of 1869"
My March is in the position described
by Me Round, I consider, and there are no others Ithout inc It will be seen from 15839/78 that he
at the time of bees transfer lette rowed the question of his ultimate pension but that no
definite refly
was
was given to him though he
told that when the time of his retirement
came he would receive all the farmable consideration that could properly be accorded to him
aß 8/9/06
I do not take such a liberal reair
as Mr Browne.
There had been a
warning
view
in
1878 that alterations in the old & favourable scheme were contemplated & Mr. March went to Hong-Kong after this, - in
And again in 1880 the Sect. of State observed
in 1879.
M
that the Scheme had not been finally adopted. It seems to therefore, that he has no claim to
be treated under the old Schame, which, not having hem ratified, can hardly be said to have been in force, and I should be inclined to deal withe Mr March
under the later Reiles which
we have
applied
decision in
Harsh's case
mithi. The
application
imilar Coentiment
applied
Officers.
to
Lo
onany other
AGHE
819
Colonial
375
Jagree with Mr. Suyulhack.
We must nor heat two mank
d bath best more farnually than our Cecil Smith with whom he here had a pulonged conterranty on their ponios
rm of
t nowastak Hạt hạnh refused on the and that having
thing Kory Kong
low conlit him right, in
thes Colony when
& rights were
Berately withheld the infeal fthe Iya allṛeliershi it is more d
tein of the applied Kong minute &
by Kong Afreier
he Meave
necmuting
siteration
I sholes to speak the hipn
Muturas.
Simi't put andrstand this Rent out 10
Thave nother for ff. tutur
Join the date
Me minute.
conversant with the
fouts please speak & hinn when
argue
De returs
ot print December is that he munt not tout Mr Manch
one St
we
n fund Run 23/10.
More formally than sin Britt, where regnert after long commpenden
(see further minutes o
separate sheets over)
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.