whether &c. 20 of the Imperial Superannuation del,
1834, which provides that in
cass of re employed.
pension to new
salary must not exceed
pensiones
1
the "profits of the office" formerly held, would be
exfplicable.
is governed
or would the
D: Clark's case governed by clause 16 of the Hong Kong Pension minute which afflies the principle of the section of the Ionferal Act of 1834 quoted above to my penoroner "appointed to an office under the Crown "
I doubt very much whether membership of the House of Commons fulfils this description, and of this view is upheld by two Risley the reply to dr. that in the event of his retum to the Hoffommons his pension from It Kory w?
Clark
Should the
not be affected.
LA man 8.1908.
think there with considerable flatter
A
the Horeans of Consmones if it learnt that cos had held membership of that House to
be an "office under the Crown" konvors that this is not the case is I think shown by the fact that the arley means by which an M.P. can resign tus seal is to obtain appointment
to some "office under the Crown" touch the Chiltern Hundreds
?
Reply as proposed
25A.
أن
A
allowan
Gand
Q
stores of cowruous
member of th
world na
to render his person liable.
deduction under
བ་རྣམམ་
to
no. 16 of the Akong
Pensious minute of 100. 2 of 1862 ?
And sand why of
cole's t
the Treasury saying that the S. J.P. is
that the allroa
advised
offier ander
the
Arer
Case
propores, with their concullence,
to decide accordingly any
that may
Mysteries
alive?
5.208
5.9
Feat.
othin
Not worth arking
Of coure that. Shife in noth
te Trown.
The
Ang g
is not prefandt return
ekly Weis Eigeng,
a
ferral
hat if he foun hand
Rian care le is admind t
at A.
12/3 Atmce is th. 13/3/18
A&C
9.3.18 9/3/18
A
matter of form we
tret ar had belle consult t
Treasury
before
deficited replying for the several question?
Say that
the receipt f
!
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.