CO129-247 - Acting Governor Fleming Governor Des Voeus - 1890 [10-12] — Page 415

CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案 All AI Reviewed

Enc. 21

His present salary was $25. Say that as Mr. Hung Kam Wing was transferred from a post (5th Clerk in Harbour Dept) to another post with a rise of pay, without receiving any increase from $864 to $1472, Lord K. considers that he may be given a similar increase notwithstanding the fact that his present salary was raised previously. It might either be given as an allowance to him, or added to the pay proper of the post. If the latter course is taken, Lord K. considers that it will not raise it unduly or disproportionately to the pay of the First Interpreter, who after all appears to perform the same duties as the 2nd.

Enc. 22. Say that this Officer formerly drew $1440 and Quarters, and now draws only $1920. The $480 may fairly be regarded as the value of the Quarters. He may therefore receive an increase not greatly in excess of that granted to other Clerks hitherto drawing $1440.

Proposed increase should, I think, be 20%. He is hardly of the class for whom the 35% increase was intended; the Police force generally getting less than the other departments; similarly, the 2nd Clerk, Mr. Madly, and the 3rd & 4th Clerks in this Department should perhaps get a similar increase (vide Enc. 24, and remarks on p. 4 regarding the rates sanctioned in 10961/81).

Enc. 24. In 1881.

As to Enc. 26, first part relating to Pensions. Point out that the argument proceeds on misapprehensions regarding pensions existing under the Municipal Board. The final pay (and not the average pay of the last 3 years) has been retained in the same office, and therefore the supposed difficulty will not arise.

Besides the above cases dealt with in the order of their mention in this despatch, the following require notice:

(2) The Clerk to the Puisne Judge. This office came into existence after 1875, in 1881, when its present pay was fixed (21144/81). It was given a 35% increase in the same way as the 1st Clerk (or Chief Justice's Clerk). I think it has been rightly done. Let it stand.

Similarly, let the 20% increase to Clerk to Registrar, Mr. Salustian Santos, stand. He was fixed in the present rate in 21145/81.

Edit History

2026-05-26 12:26:46 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

Enc. 21His present salary was $25. Say that as Mr. Hung Kam Wing was transferred from a post (5th Clerk in Harbour Dept) to another post with a rise of pay, without receiving any increase from $864 to $1472, Lord K. considers that he may be given a similar increase notwithstanding the fact that his present salary was raised previously. It might either be given as an allowance to him, or added to the pay proper of the post. If the latter course is taken, Lord K. considers that it will not raise it unduly or disproportionately to the pay of the First Interpreter, who after all appears to perform the same duties as the 2nd.Enc. 22. Say that this Officer formerly drew $1440 and Quarters, and now draws only $1920. The $480 may fairly be regarded as the value of the Quarters. He may therefore receive an increase not greatly in excess of that granted to other Clerks hitherto drawing $1440.Proposed increase should, I think, be 20%. He is hardly of the class for whom the 35% increase was intended; the Police force generally getting less than the other departments; similarly, the 2nd Clerk, Mr. Madly, and the 3rd & 4th Clerks in this Department should perhaps get a similar increase (vide Enc. 24, and remarks on p. 4 regarding the rates sanctioned in 10961/81).Enc. 24. In 1881.As to Enc. 26, first part relating to Pensions. Point out that the argument proceeds on misapprehensions regarding pensions existing under the Municipal Board. The final pay (and not the average pay of the last 3 years) has been retained in the same office, and therefore the supposed difficulty will not arise.Besides the above cases dealt with in the order of their mention in this despatch, the following require notice:(2) The Clerk to the Puisne Judge. This office came into existence after 1875, in 1881, when its present pay was fixed (21144/81). It was given a 35% increase in the same way as the 1st Clerk (or Chief Justice's Clerk). I think it has been rightly done. Let it stand.Similarly, let the 20% increase to Clerk to Registrar, Mr. Salustian Santos, stand. He was fixed in the present rate in 21145/81.

Baseline (Original)

Enc. 21his present was 25:? Say that as M. Hung Kann Weing transferred from a post (5th Clerk in Harban Dept) to another post rise of pay, withunt receiving anyand as the former postČETRASдеваto #864, 14720 increase from Lord K. Considers that he may bo given a similar increase notwithstand the fact that his present fort was raised prevrinaly might wither be given allavance to hein,Cthis increaseQa persmel added & thon pay proper of the pest, if the far.Considers that the latter course will not raise it undele et sproportionsty to the pony of the First Interpreter who after all appears to perform the face & no higher duties than the 27Enc. 22.? Say that1875A this Officer in drew #1440 & Quarters and now draws andy #1920 the $480 may fail be regarded of the Quarters, the as unlisu may thereforeHow receive ygirly great to that granted to antish Clarks hithertonLondrawinga1Pro III VI ILONIN creas but it should I think and be 20% he is hardly of the class for when the 35% increase was intended; the Police force generally getting less than thefrumtrebelX. He wrait moted from ranker of Por*see$23 other depts; similarly the 2nd Clark Maddy Falso the 3rd & 4th Clerks in this the 20-20-%Jac. 24 Dep. should perhaps get rease given on p. 4 increase (for reann, the rates sanctimes (in Ene. 2610961/81). in 1881.As to Enc. 26, first part relating to Pausimus? Point out that the argument proceeds en aas pensions Existingare misapprehensions under the Muinte bardELL413the finalpaz pay (& not the average fan of last 3in cases where the officer years) has retained the same office, and therefore the supposed difficult will not arise.which IhnenBesides the above cases dealt with in the order of their mention in this despt the following requir notice2 (or 2 mm Clarkin Fuse. ("^.) The Clerk to the Purane Judge Joan officethat came into existenc after 1875, din 1881 when itsfixed21144/81 present pay wananother.ffice (Clerk of thee (ourt) abolishedbeen given Same way✓WhaI think it has rightly35 per cent increase in as the 1" Clerk (or (hiefJustices (lark) Let it stand?Similarly let the 20% werean to Clerk to Salustian Stans. He was fixed in present rate in 21145/818

2026-05-26 12:26:46 · Baseline

View content

Enc. 21

his present

was 25

:? Say that as M. Hung Kann Weing transferred from a post (5th Clerk in Harban Dept) to another post

rise of pay,

withunt receiving any and as the former post

ČETRAS

дева

to #864, 14720 increase from Lord K. Considers that he may bo

given

a similar increase notwithstand the fact that his present fort was raised prevrinaly

might wither be given allavance to hein,

this increase

a persmel

added & thon

pay proper of the pest, if the far.

Considers that the latter course will not raise it undele et sproportion

sty to the pony of the First Interpreter who after all appears to perform the face & no higher duties than the 27

Enc. 22. ? Say that

1875

this Officer in drew #1440 & Quarters

and now draws andy #1920 the $480 may fail be regarded of the Quarters, the

as un

lisu

may therefore

How

receive y

girly great to that granted to antish Clarks hitherton

Londrawing

Pro III VI ILONIN creas but it should I think and be 20% he is hardly of the class for when the 35% increase was intended; the Police force generally getting less than the frum

tre

bel

X. He wrait moted from ranker of Por

see

$23

other depts; similarly the 2nd Clark Maddy Falso the 3rd & 4th Clerks in this

the 20-

20-%

Jac. 24 Dep. should perhaps get

rease given on p. 4 increase (for reann,

the rates sanctimes (in Ene. 26

10961/81).

in 1881.

As to Enc. 26, first part relating to Pausimus

? Point out that the argument proceeds

en a

as pensions Existing

are

misapprehensions

under the

Muinte bard

ELL

413

the final paz

pay (& not the average fan of last 3

in cases where the officer years) has retained the same office, and therefore the supposed difficult

will not arise.

which Ihnen

Besides the above cases dealt with in the order of their mention in this despt the following requir notice

2 (or 2 mm Clarkin Fuse. ("^.) The Clerk to the Purane Judge Joan

office that came into existenc after 1875, din 1881 when its

fixed

21144/81 present pay

wan

another.

ffice (Clerk of thee (ourt) abolished

been given

Same way

✓

Wha

I think it has rightly

35 per cent increase in as the 1" Clerk (or (hief

Justices (lark)

Let it stand?

Similarly let the 20% werean to Clerk to

Salustian Stans. He was fixed in present rate in 21145/818

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.