523
his seven years as a Judge he would not get the benefit of Rule 2 of the Pension Minute and would therefore lose
a sum of £66 a year on his pension. He said this was
a most serious matter to him, and he begged to be allowed
to complete the period required.
7.
In reply I said I could not give any reasons beyond those contained in the decision of the Governor-in-Council. I pointed out that the introduction of ordinance 1 of 1910 in March of 1212 that year had formed an intimation to all Civil officers that they were liable to retirement at the age of 60, and I could hold out no hope of any alteration but I would inform you of the loss of pension which he would suffer, and if he desired me to make any communication to you by telegrap} or despatch in reference to his retirement and as to the action of the Governor-in-Council I would do so. He continued to demand reasons which I again and again declined to give. He informed me some time ago that he had no intention of taking any leave prior to April 30th.
8.
On December 27th. I received the
further letter which I have the honour to enclose. I feel bound to observe in regard to the points made in this letter that the intimation of his retirement was made some six months before he reached the required age; a longer notice could hardly be possible or expected.
ith reference to the service he claims to have rendered to the Colony by undertaking the Revision of the Laws I have to inform you that he engaged to perform this work for a remuneration which was considerably higher then the xecutive Council had at first intended to expend, or considered adequate, but they were unwilling to haggle with an officer holding the high office of Chief Justice, and that since the agreement was executed he has addressed a series of letters to me urging that
Enclosure II
the
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.