CO129-456 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1919 [10-12] — Page 380

が

361

5.

In paragraph 10 of their report the

1 Commission recommend that an officer acting for a superior

officer when on leave should receive the salary due to an

acting officer under the existing regulations from the date

of assuming the duties of such acting appointment. Mr. Severn in paragraph 7 of his Confidential Despatch of 15th

April makes the counter-suggestion that an officer should

draw the minimum salary of the post in which he is acting.

On the whole I am inclined to agree with Mr. Savern, as the

adoption of the principle which be suggests would remova

some minor anomalies (e.g. under the present rules it is

occasionally found that the acting officer recaives more

than the substantive officer, owing to the fact that he

draws the increments on his own salary in full in addition

to the minimum salaries of the two posts) but I do not think

that the principle could be adopted throughout the service,

since in the case of such highly paid non-incremental posts

as that of Chief Justice or Colonial Secretary the addition-

-al expense involved would be very large. I should be in- -clined to adopt a compromise and to accept Mr. Severn's view in regard to the service generally but to make an exception in the case of the posts of Colonial Secretary, Chief Justice, Puisme Judge and Attorney-General applying to them the existing rule as to the half-salaries of the two appointments.

In my case, however, I support the suggestion that the acting pay, however arrived at, should be payable from the date on which the officer begins to act instead of on the completion of the vacation leave of the substantive holder of the post. I do not propose that this course should be adopted when an officer is acting for another who is only taking vacation leave but that it should apply only in cases where the substantive holder of the post is on long leave.

P