Mr. Dixon's appointment. The reason why the rates of salary are different will be explained by reference to the Secretary of State's Despatch No. 109 of 20th December, 1895.
Gov 22079/95 Secretary of State's Despatch No. 183 of 8th September, 1899. Secretary of State's Despatch No. 165 of 19th December, 1899. Governor's Despatch No. 224 of 24th April, 1903. Go 2053/63 Secretary of State's Confidential Despatch of 25th June, 1903.
The despatches noted in the margin regard-ing the grant of Exchange Compensation to Mr. Dixon and the refusal of Mr. Reed's petition for a similar privilege.
Go 19218/03 3. Mr. Johnston, the Postmaster-General, who is now on leave in England, had in the first instance recommended Mr. Reed for the higher rate of salary, and it was, I think, although the matter is not on record, owing to the fact of his not being entitled to Exchange Compensation that it was subsequently recommended the lower scale, as stated in the 2nd paragraph of the above quoted Despatch, should be adopted, with the reservation however that it might be advisable to adopt the higher scale when a new appointment of Accountant was made.
4. It is very doubtful whether the distinction between Mr. Dixon and Mr. Reed, in so far as the former was in 1899 remitting money for the support of his step-father's sister in Ireland, and as the latter failed
...........
16
Mr. Dixon's appointment. The reason why the rates of salary
are different will be explained by reference to the Des-
Gov 2207995
eCetary of State's Despatch No.) 09 of 20th. December, 1895.
Becretary of State's Despatch No. 183 of 8th. September, 1899.m,
2219
99 Secretary of State's Despatch No. 165 of 19th. December, 1899780
Governor's Despatch No. 224 of 24th. April, 1903. Go 20535
-63
Secretary of State's Confidential Despatch of 25th. June, 1903.
-patches noted in the margin regard-
-ing the grant of Exchange Compensa-
-tion to Mr. Dixon and the refusal
of Mr. Reed's petition for a similar
privilege.
Go 19218
03
3.
Mr. Johnston the
Postmaster-General, who is now on leave in England, had in
the first instance recommended Mr. Reed for the higher
rate of salary, and it was, I think, although the matter
is not on record, owing to the fact of his not being en-
-titled to Exchange Compensation that it was subsequently
recommended the lower scale, as stated in the 2nd. para-
-graph of the above quoted Despatch, should be adopted,
with the reservation however that it might be advisable to
adopt the higher scale when a new appointment of Accountant
was made.
4.
It is very doubtful whether the
distinction between Mr. Dixon and Mr. Reed, in so far as
the former was in 1899 remitting money for the support of
his step-father's sister in Ireland, and as the latter
failed
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.