CO129-240 - Public Offices & Others - 1888 — Page 473

de will not have had 15 yeau pensionall

Service,

a4

his first leave does not count

(or ? under latest sales only counts half- times, this second leave with be cancelled. altogether under the special replation. tish is a man about 40 in good healt

I do not think the Regulations thould be stretched in his fowou

Mr Rand

JAN 25/1188

& Under existing rules all Leave

previon

ins £7887 coments fe as service.

Pension Papers in 15052/8f desf th therem & the reply, 5485/87)

(see 5.9.

19748/27

? When that

The new rule proposed will not affect this man rule (which it is proposed to be retrospection) is framed, the deaves granted previous to 1887 will still be counted in full, & not as half

half time HA,

Juningine

?

5.W 9.27 Jan

MW. Meade. The Regulations of 1804 remite service to the "complete year

The Regulations issued in 1881 { copy in 7879)

do not state that leave granted prior to that

date would be counted in full, t I much doubt Whether there was any specific regulation to that

کسهای

Jaguar

Who certain wichides. months on helppe have fine cxclude server not in the Police.

atonce

Au 2071

Effect; I feel pretty bask Sanctured one, tif the

are here

461

result of the despatel on 19760 is to let Policemen, Who took leave from 1001 to 100% on the understanding that it was not to count at all, in the and count it was half

such leave, time for service, Isee no reason why

ing

}

leaur

jranted Carlin still thould

be counted as full time, contrary I

thereumle

he

jeneral pension minutes of the Colony: Incan that if it is the retrospective at all, it should be for all, tho back to the beginning of every body; service_

1

In this case, we have only got the have certificat. to po upon, which says that when he came on leave he had been in the service of the Colony 15 years tore mouth; but leave certificates are rever so accarately drown as paper of particulars, When proposed in his first minute Samuld

writing him as Mr

word it so as to Thew that we did not

recessaril recognize that he had a

claims to retire at all (He does not (1.0. profen the Ill the 18087 he implied that he,

be would go back when his wife was well). INR 37/185