CO129-305 - Governor Sir Blake - 1901 [5-7] — Page 283

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

Committee's recommendations as regards their salaries. But in fact the mandates recommended an incremental majority; and I do not follow the interrelation question at all. Why not others? "Present rate" included, but why does the Case of the "Click to the Registration and Hindustani Interference" differ from that on the 1901 Estimates? Moreover, the Governor proposes (as I read it) to accept the Committee's recommendation as regards the salary of Secretary ($3,000) to the Sanitary Board, the same as before, but in a separate despatch he is proposing to offer the post to Mr. Woodcock at $3,000 to $4,200.

The total increase is about $53,250 (maximum), assuming that Sir Henry Blake does recommend for approval the Committee's recommendations as regards the staff not included in the classification. The new rates will not affect the Shanghai Port Officers' salary, and soon the promised scheme of reorganization for the Colonial Secretary's Office will affect the chances of your inferiors.

If the scheme is approved, the increases not given in 1902 will not be the cause of any delay. I think we should certainly refuse to let the increases count from January last. It is characteristically bad finance.

A. F. 9/7 approve the Governor's proposals and inform the Colonial Audit Branch.

Roughly how many Inspectors would be included in this list? Will the proposed increases be less or more than they were given compensation on the occasion of their salaries?

Mr. Lucas: 1) About 100. 2) Less by about 30 percent, as far as I can tell; but there is a good deal of uncertainty about the detail.

A. F. I think we must approve. As from the first of January next, leaving the starting question alone for the moment (Para. 15 GR.40).

Page 73

81216--4000-6-1900

Edit History

2026-05-31 18:28:01 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
Committee's recommendations as regards their salaries. But in fact the mandates recommended an incremental majority; and I do not follow the interrelation question at all. Why not others? "Present rate" included, but why does the Case of the "Click to the Registration and Hindustani Interference" differ from that on the 1901 Estimates? Moreover, the Governor proposes (as I read it) to accept the Committee's recommendation as regards the salary of Secretary ($3,000) to the Sanitary Board, the same as before, but in a separate despatch he is proposing to offer the post to Mr. Woodcock at $3,000 to $4,200. The total increase is about $53,250 (maximum), assuming that Sir Henry Blake does recommend for approval the Committee's recommendations as regards the staff not included in the classification. The new rates will not affect the Shanghai Port Officers' salary, and soon the promised scheme of reorganization for the Colonial Secretary's Office will affect the chances of your inferiors. If the scheme is approved, the increases not given in 1902 will not be the cause of any delay. I think we should certainly refuse to let the increases count from January last. It is characteristically bad finance. A. F. 9/7 approve the Governor's proposals and inform the Colonial Audit Branch. Roughly how many Inspectors would be included in this list? Will the proposed increases be less or more than they were given compensation on the occasion of their salaries? Mr. Lucas: 1) About 100. 2) Less by about 30 percent, as far as I can tell; but there is a good deal of uncertainty about the detail. A. F. I think we must approve. As from the first of January next, leaving the starting question alone for the moment (Para. 15 GR.40). Page 73 81216--4000-6-1900
Baseline (Original)
Committee's recommendations as regards their salaries. But wi fact the mandates recommended an majority mary of the incremental; and I do not follow the interforelation question at all. Why AOL. not others. "present "rate Case interfuites mcluded, but and why why does the 73 ~1.5. mi the of the "Click to the Registion and Hindustani Interferete" die the Supreme Caust - differ from that on the 1901 Estimates? Moreover, the Governor profores (20 I read it) tracceft the Committe's recommendation as the regards the salary o Secutory $3,000): to the Sanitary A3 300 the same but in a Bound despatch mail he is proposing offer the fort to Mr. Woodcock $3,000 to $4,200. to GRA The total increase is about $53,250 ( maximum), assuming, a thurik that Sir Henry niay Blake does recommend for approval the Committee's recommendations as regards the affo not included in the classification. The new re not to J & the Shanghai Port Officed him addy to this, and souill the promised scheme of reorganization for the Colonial Secretary's Office. affert the chance your lyforens If scheme shall is apkured, 4x4. the increases not given El 1902 his will not be the cen asay AF 81216-- 4000-6-1900 ་་ ་་ inform the W-0. and the Colonial Audit Branch. I think we should certainly refuse to let the micrases count fou! Jan last. It i characteristically bad finance. A. F. ? 9/7 approve the Governor Sinoposals and inform Kd. Andet Branch. Mi Fiddian Roughly How ED Lova W.0. and 277 many Inspeaus would be included in this list: d there Who are included, Will the purposed incrases be less or more than they were given compensation on the in which salaries? Mr. Lucas 1) About 100. Md 13. if 2) Less by about 30 fercent, 20 for as I can tell; but then is a good deal of uncertainty. 15/3 about the detail. A. F. la m.Ommar I think we must approte. As from the first of January next, leaving the starting question alone for the moment (Pd. 15 GR.40 སཝརཱཔཱདྷཱསཱི; ཏནྣཱམྨསྶ,
2026-05-31 18:28:01 · Baseline
View content

Committee's recommendations as regards their

salaries. But

wi

fact the mandates recommended an

majority

mary of the

incremental; and I do not

follow the interforelation question at all.

Why

AOL.

not others. "present "rate

Case

interfuites mcluded, but and why

why does the

73

~1.5.

mi

the

of the "Click to the Registion and Hindustani Interferete" die the Supreme Caust - differ from that on the 1901

Estimates? Moreover, the Governor profores

(20

I read it) tracceft the Committe's

recommendation as

the

regards the salary o

Secutory $3,000):

to the Sanitary

A3

300

the same

but in a

Bound

despatch

mail he is proposing

offer the fort to Mr. Woodcock

$3,000 to $4,200.

to

GRA

The total increase is about

$53,250 ( maximum), assuming, a

thurik

that Sir Henry

niay Blake does recommend for approval the Committee's recommendations as

regards the affo not included in the classification. The new re

not

to

J

& the Shanghai Port Officed him addy to this, and souill the promised scheme of reorganization for the Colonial Secretary's Office. affert the chance your lyforens

If scheme

shall

is apkured,

4x4.

the increases

not given El 1902

his will not

be the cen

asay

AF

81216-- 4000-6-1900

་་ ་་

inform the W-0. and the Colonial Audit Branch. I think we should certainly refuse to let the micrases count fou! Jan last. It i characteristically bad finance.

A. F.

? 9/7

approve the Governor Sinoposals and inform Kd. Andet Branch.

Mi Fiddian

Roughly

How

ED

Lova

W.0. and

277

many Inspeaus would

be included in this list: d

there

Who are included, Will the purposed incrases be less or more than

they were given compensation on

the in which salaries?

Mr. Lucas

1) About 100.

Md

13.

if

2) Less by about 30 fercent, 20 for as I can tell; but then is a good deal of uncertainty.

15/3

about the detail.

A. F.

la m.Ommar

I think we must approte. As from the first of January next, leaving the starting question alone for the moment (Pd. 15 GR.40

སཝརཱཔཱདྷཱསཱི; ཏནྣཱམྨསྶ,

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.