3. Jenɩuue
4. I will endeavour to make my points as shortly as possible. I can only see two possible objections to the course suggested by me. The first might be that an officer cannot be held to have earned half-pay leave in a Colony in which he has not yet taken up his appointment. But I would point out that the service of the Federated Malay States, the Straits Settlements, and Hongkong have been specially grouped and have a peculiar and intimate relation to each other.
5. Up to the present, no Hongkong Officer has gone on promotion to the Straits Settlements or the Federated Malay States, but transfers to Hongkong have been frequent, and officers transferred have been most liberally treated by this Colony in the matter of half-pay leave. I myself, having been transferred to Hongkong in September, 1897, after 13 years' service in the Straits, went home on 15 months' leave in March 1898, after only 6 months' service in Hongkong. Since then, Messrs. Kysha, Irving, Lyons, Wolfe, and Cross have all enjoyed, from this Colony, half-pay leave, a considerable portion of which had been earned in the Straits Settlements or Federated Malay States. With all these precedents on one side, I submit that the other side should now have a turn, and that the half-pay leave of a Hongkong officer transferred to the Straits Settlements should now be borne by the latter Colony.
There is a second objection that might be made, namely, that unless the whole salary of the Puisne Judge was available, it would not be possible to make arrangements for the due performance in Singapore of Mr. Smith's duties during his absence on leave. I think, however, there may have been some misconception on this point. The circumstances, as I understand them from...
༥༢ལྭ།
A
auto uc、 od 9×62 0! quonof wij sy81 1
འ ་ „
་་
3. Jenɩuue
!
Jr
►
#: 2017A)
I
J:
:
1)
1
192
8021JJ.:ARATOR"
رابع في
112 not meant no J
1 lar: 01.04)
Jard co
BIOPLC.
while the present arrangement means that promotion in the
Hongkong Service already highly congested will be blocked until
the end of the current year.
4.
i will endeavour to make my points as shortly
as possible. I can only see two possible objections to the course
suggested by me. The first might be that an officer cannot be
held to have earned half pay leave in a Colony in which he has
not yet taken up his appointment. But I would point out that the
service of the Federated Malay States the Straits Settlements and
Hongkong have been specially grouped and have a peculiar and
intimate relation to each other.
5.
Up to the present no Hongkong Officer has
gone on promotion to the Straits Settlements or the Federatel
Malay States but transfers to hongkong have been frequent and
officers transferred have been most liberally treated by this
Colony in the matter of half pay leave.
i ayself having been transferred to Hongkong
in September, 1997, after 1/3 years service in the Straits went
home on 15 months leave in March 1998 after only 6 months service
in Mongkong. Since then Messrs. Kysha, Irving, Lyons, Wolfe and
ross have all enjoyel from this Colony half pay leave a consider-
-able portion of which had been earned in the Straits Settlements
or Federatel Malay States. With all these precedents on one side
I submit that the other side shoull now have a turn and that the
half pay leave of a Hongkong officer transferrel to the Straits
Settioments should now be borne by the latter Colony.
there is a second objection that might be
male barely that unless the whole salary of the Puisne Judge was available it would not be possible to make arrangements for the
due performance in Singapore of Mr. Smith's duties during his
absence on leave. I think however there may bave been some cis-
-conception on this point. The circumstances as I understand them
from
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.