Enclosure 4.
Your Excellency,
Mr. Irving does not and cannot contend that he is a Cadet: what he contends for is that he has the Status of a Cadet, and as such is entitled to promotion to posts to which Cadets have a preferential claim.
2. The fact that he holds an office to which a Cadet has a preferential claim is no argument that he has the status of a Cadet: if it were an argument, it would follow that Messrs. Hazeland, Seth, J.W. Lee-Jones, Lyons, Wodehouse, Chapman, Woodcock and Lewis, who all hold Cadet offices, would have the same status: quod est absurdum.
3. The ground on which Mr. Irving bases his claim to Cadet status is apparently that his appointment in 1891 as a Junior Officer in the State of Perak was an appointment to an office to which, when the various Malay States became federated in 1895, a Cadet would have been appointed, and that upon the Federation taking place in 1895 the Officers then in the various native States were not disturbed in their appointments, but were permitted to hold them on equal footing with Cadets, promotion, as between Cadets and former Officers, being determined by seniority.
4. Mr. Irving is in error, I think, in stating in the 3rd paragraph of his letter that the position of Junior Officers and Officers originally appointed as such was assured by putting them on a par with Cadets and passed Cadets in the Straits Settlements: for the Federated Malay States and the Straits Settlements Services are separate Services; and prior to the federation of the Federated Malay States, Cadet Officers in the Straits Settlements were not appointed to the native States.
•ABOÐTR
„Ɛ saunofɔnti vnachopos of
‚Y"ADE7098 non? „atali-dogłquirt of .I
.100
TO:STOD
t
of galain berbami Yu0% 875! [ob
modoage. ↑ Jeog dgnoos of wifi. notmise aid? repitto
(gxoxgnoli (afoodab te
Byna sta“, .008% to ancestoni (#bnubird yd qilit met
.eus El
Jique I Int beltiCo
91B UOV
•ORGOLE
%%0, 670g!
nd qnival MØTT
.S
.Ingr
* 40 **** q&¢
bre
eldiamoqni
LOO
t
TLAJA7002 1973 19
cipnumo* toidær- ot-
Tot valtio te bie
.vfs. Initob vijon vð
.JI
oj bebre tot netissè Icus wey - iu "enotaafmon
Chi
flano
b 5 modstena 10% OLEH háu stabibro quoɔano"
to latene0-Jnahẳnafi acis Yo sman oba) *
ARODA.. -10JO
..
Enclosure 4.
OP Y.
Your Excellency,
C O
424482
RECE
Rag 17 NOV 06
}
Mr. Irving does net and cannot contend that he is a Cadet: what he contends for is that he has the Status of a Cadet, and as such is entitled to promotion to posts to which Cadets have a preferential
clain.
2.
The fact that he holds an office
to which a Cadet has a preferential claim is ne argumENT that he has the status of a Cadet: if it were an argument, it would follow that Messrs. Hazeland, Seth, J.W.Lee-Jones, Lyons, Wodehouse, Chapman, Woodcock and Lewis who all hold Cadet offices, would have the same status: quod est absur-
-dum.
3.
The ground on which Mr. Irving
bases his claim to Cadet status is apparently that his appointment in 1891 as a Junior Officer in the State of Perak was an appointment to an office to which, when the various Malay States became federated in 1895, a Cadet would have been appointed, and that upon the Federation taking place in 1895 the Officers then in the various natives States were not disturbed in their appointments, but were permitted to hold them on equal footing with Cadets, promotion, as between Cadets and former Officers,
being determined by seniority.
4.
Mr. Irving is in error I think in
stating in the 3rd. paragraph of his letter that the position of Junior Officers and Officers originally appoint- -ed as such was assured by putting them on a par with Cadets and passed Cadets in the Straits Settlements: for the Federated Malay States and the Straits Settlements Services are separate Services; and prior to the federa- -tion of the Federated walay States, Cadet Officers in the Straits Settlements were not appointed to the native
States
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.