the Hon. F. R. May, C.M.G.
Sir,
ENCLOSURE D.
C. O.
Rangoon. Feb. 3, 1903.
755
I have the honour to inform you that I received your letter of Jan. 17 yesterday, on my arrival in Rangoon. I find that it is a reply to my letter of Dec. 21, 1902, in which I accepted the offer of the Hongkong Government to undertake the indexing of the Council Chamber Library and the revision of the system by which documents are filed and recorded in the Colonial Secretary's Office.
2. You inform me that Mr. Drayson, Chief Clerk in the Colonial Secretary's Office, has undertaken to do the work referred to without remuneration, and that my services are not, therefore, required.
3. As the letter I am now replying to is in direct contradiction of your letter of October 29, 1902, I find it necessary to lay the following facts before you for consideration, and to beg that you will inform me of your final decision in the matter as soon as your convenience will permit.
4. In July 1902, I was asked verbally by you whether I would undertake the work referred to in Par. 1 of this letter. I replied that although the matter would put me to some inconvenience, owing to the pressing nature of my work, I would be glad to do the work referred to if I were officially requested to do so, as I was anxious to repay in any way I could the great kindness shown me by the Colonial Office in London. You informed me later, late in July or early in August, that permission had been written for the Secretary of State for the Colonies to secure my services for the proposed work.
5. On Dec. 17, 1902, on my arrival in Singapore, I received your letter, No. 2371, informing me that the Secretary of State for the Colonies had approved of my temporary employment for the purpose of performing the work in question on my return to Hongkong in 1903, and that a fee of $100 would be paid me on its completion.
6. On Dec. 21, 1902, I replied to your letter, accepting the temporary employment offered me by the Hongkong Government and stating that I would commence work in November, 1903.
7. I wrote to the University of Chicago informing the President of my employment by you, made the necessary changes in my plans so as to permit of my doing the work, and considered the matter concluded.
8. Your letter of Jan. 17, 1903, informs me that my services are not now required, and the reason assigned is that Mr. Drayson has undertaken to perform the work which I was engaged by you to perform.
9. Confining myself for the moment to the question of that courtesy which a professional man expects to receive at the hands of those who seek to secure his services, I say point out,
A. That as Mr. Drayson works every day in your office, and has done so since the question of my employment was first raised, it is unfortunate that Mr. Drayson's ability to do the work referred to and his willingness to undertake it should not have been discovered until after I had been engaged to do the work.
B. That if this simple step had been taken, I should have been spared what every professional man would regard as an affront, namely the receipt of an official request to undertake certain work, a request made spontaneously by the Government of Hongkong, stating the exact work to be done, the time of performance, the fee to be paid—a request which I granted merely out of consideration for the courteous treatment I had received in Downing Street—and the receipt within three months of another official letter informing me that my services are not required because another gentleman, who was at hand when the proposal to me was first made and could at any time have been given the work, has undertaken to do it without remuneration.
10. As far as Mr. Drayson's part in this matter is concerned, two considerations...
Copy.
the Hon. F. R.May,C.M.G.
Sir,
ENCLOSURE D.
C. 0.
Rangoon. Feb. 3,1903.
755
fo
}
:
have the honour to inform you that I received your letter of ban. yesterday,on by arrival in Rangoon. I find that it is a reply to my letter of Dec. 21, 1902 in which
accepted the offer of the Hongkong Government to undertake the indexing of the Coun- cil Chamber Library and the revision of the system by which documents are filed and resodded in the Colonial Secretary's Office.
2. You inform me that Mr.Drayson, Chief Clerk in the Colonial Secretary's Office has undertaken to do the work referred to without remuneration, and that my services are not, therefore,required.
3. As the letter I am now replying to is in direct contradiction of your letter of October 29.19023, I find it necessary to lay the following facts before you for consider atlon, and to beg that you will inform me of your final decision in the matter as soon as your convenience will permit.
4. In July 1902 I was asked verbally by you whether I would undertake the work ce- ferred to in Par. 1 of this letter. I replied that although the matter would put me to one inconvenience, owing to the pressing nature of my work, I would be glad to do the Hork referred to if I were officially requested to do so, as I was anxious to repay in
any way I could the great kindness shown me by the Colonial Office in London. You informed me later, late in July or early in August, that permission had been written for to the Secretary of State for the Colonies to secure my services for the proposed work.
5. On Dec. 17,1902, on my arrival in Singapore, I received your letter, No.2371, in- forming me that the Secretary of State for the Col.mies had approved of my temporary employment for the purpose of performing the work in question on my return to Hongkong In 1903, and that a fee of $ 100 would be paid me on its completion.
6. On Dec. 21,1902 I replied to your letter, accepting the temporary employment offered me by the Hongkong Government and stating that I would commence work in Noven- ber, 1903.
7. I wrote to the University of Chicago informing the President of my employment
by you, made the necessary changes in my plans so as to pernit of my doing the work, and considered the matter concluded.
8. Your letter of Jan. 17,1903 informs me that my services are not now required,
and the reason assigned is that Mr. Drayson has undertaken to perform the work which I was engaged by you to perform.
9. Confining myself for the moment to the question of that courtesy which a pro- fessional man expects to receive at the hands of those who seek to secure his services
say point out,
A. That as Mr. Drayson works every day in your office, and has done so since the question of my employment was first raised, it is unfortunate that Mr. Brayson's ability to do the work referred to and his willingness to undertake it should not have been discovered until after I had been engaged to do the work.
B. That if this simple step had been taken I should have been spared what every professional man would regard as an affront, namely the receipt of an official request to undertake certain work, a request made spontaneously by the Government of Hongkong,stating the exact work to be done, the time of performance, the fee to be aida request which I granted merely out of consideration for the courteous treat- ent I had received in Downing Street
and the receipt within three months of other official letter informing me that my services are not required because anoth- gentleman, who was at hand when the proposal to me was first, made and could at any time have been given the work, has undertaken to do it without remuneration.
10. As far as Mr. Drayson's part in this matter is concerned two considerations
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.