Tula magia ja diang
COR
Your Excellency,
Enclosure 2
Minute
20198
RECE
&
Pee? 25 JUN 00
257
Reply that the explicit direction to strike Mr.
Arthur's name off the list was conveyed by the Secretary of
State in a despatch dated 2ånd. September, 1892, and on view
of the list published under the Gazette Notification $00 or
End. July 92 - and that the reason assigned for the decision
was that Mr.Arthur had "received an increase of over 14% of
his salary”.
Add that if he is still dissatisfied, you will be glad to forward any representation he may wish to make to the
Secretary of State if sent in in triplicate.
(Mr.Arthur is in my opinion right in his contention,
ers fright
Lord Krustford laid down in his despatch 110 of 19th. June,
1890, that the condition of forfeiture by officers,
to
4/2 rate was the receipt of an increase of not less than 14%
"to their present emoluments". (please see place marked). The warmer in which Mr. Arthur's increase was arrived at is shown
in Secretary of State 237 of 2nd. October 1891, attached. He
was given 35% on his salary (the post not having carried free
quartar in 1875) less the estimated value of the quarters
given in the interval between 1875 and 1890, or $360 a year. But that does not effect Mr.Arthur's point which is, as far as I can see, good)
1398
9.90
(Sd.) G.T.M. O'Brien,
C.S.
83. 10. 93.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.