CO129-250 - Acting Governor Barker - 1891 [6-8] — Page 390

any period previons to that date be would apparently have a claim to 20° Jears but the Attery Pension Mimete

gives a claim to pension from date of app?

M. Johnson.

5.W.7.25750

کھے۔

will have hard resethan digree that W-Dave to 25 years pensionable service on 15 No-hext, & atte from 16027 that the medical certificate in tile accepted unders he wiches to

return alttal daté

Jam not quite clea about the mount of thin pensionable in stumments on

which hiptension thuld be based

17140 Su

nee sha that he Joe, wri wish to

return

The 14th clause of the Stel

Hughey pension minute said that the salary of the me permanent Office muthat have been revised during the last 3 years, onder tisice the pension was Bhaber computed Average of the last 3 years.

PL

#c

This feature in

comewhat unmeal but I do noththink it at

all necessarily méresmetle where a man referen

bery shorts after getting

".

2.

ace ar

a considerall Mercase

donkew

Have we definitis committed onore was th Stering the practice in the few minute; seve if we have

wet by any precedents orokémie... bound to five Capiscame the benefit of it-

also has Capt Dlane by had a bodpy allon #$1320

Difteen the excessive way when reduced

вия

M. Meade

Astom Roundé queries

386

1. We have in new draft densid Mines (on 4982/800) adopted the thant's practice which bases the pensin (not on the average and)!

officer

the final pay where an has not been promoted to another

Jann

sony

office.

t

Say

that im

par. 4 of desp. 72 (m 1123/90-1) I drafted

ar

Though

this was

then make

in the Existing minte", which is not the case. Strictly speaking Mideana is not entitled to the benefit of them new rule. The only precedent for ė. by parving thes giving him the benefit, that I kan discover, is the case

is the case of M. Brice who received

allowance in

Even

certain fees that he voluntaret. relinquished twas allowed to count. the amount in full for remain though he drew it less than three years. This was however hardly

all Jours

with M. Deane's.

a casc

I am inclined to think that he was Stable a reasonable claim to the benefit of the rule about to be made, on the ground that we Wt. 86 replied rule as 4 by 4982/88

X. In then drop?

to

approved that long ago as 1886 h, and that. we implied (in the erroneous par. above,

Page 390F