CO129-466 - Individuals - 1920 — Page 621

Tr. Disson.

Colonier Colonie Office,

or Collin

A copy is enclosed of the Admiralty letter referred to in Pare. 2. of Captain Taylour's letter. Captain Taylour's letter does not mention that a refund has been made to him of the Admiralty Bonus of 25% of Naval Pay (which had previously been deducted from his salary in calculating his Colonial Allowance) but from this refund was deducted 10% of his Colonial salary, in accordance with the Admiralty letter.

Capt.Taylour is one of the officers specifically mentioned on the list which accompanied the letter from the Admiralty.

W.a. Minify.

22/9/20.

refly

to

Caft. Jaylow.

that the S. of s

itat

+

leannt

the

has made congiunilo

to a

ماميه

Freeway

have tecided officer sex longing

Cost Dafit in this countery in the Nanny during

Nanel Pay

decisiva

the case of

sing of

25 %

Naval

recorded

Pay

وعد

from Ciril salony

ferral

Ameed

of

Y

not

بارية

to a

that

ukak

mot

to be

haust this cossion

of a feverious decision

Say 10 to

Lue

reduos

effective pay

of the 5. of §.

Col. remice seuning

thent

سعة

that

for the purpose of draduction

would involve Cinal salary in renfort of harrift at he is award,

the fractive the

case of office of the babe to follow

Homme

Civil Servants

سبعة

;

Rear

Outs

the Money

regando

heahor

nuching of the Theaning

for this

it балала

made

35% deducted

regrets

in respect of whe

when a

Adhens bonus of Le salary

thi

ber

of

10

ima

cer, the

Kat

*

›

Some

t

to t

he is

umalike

zed Curs

his unghes

50.11 N.F. (1) 3408/12359

Gentlemen,

===========

COPY.

Admiralty,

10th August 1920.

617

Received Crown Agents 11th August 1920.

I have to inform you that as a result of an appeal by a Yetired Naval Officer, who during the War, was in receipt of difference of Civil Pay from another Government Department, it has been. necessary to obtain a Treasury ruling on the interpretation of that Department's circular of 20th August 1914, No.1710/14.

The particular point at issue was whether the bonus of 25%

of Naval Pay, which was paid during the War, to Officers who were recalled from the retired or emergency list of the Royal Navy should be regarded as Naval Pay for the purpose of deduction from Civil Salary under the provisions of the Treasury cifc las quoted.

In all communications sent by this Tepartment in reply to requests for information as to Naval Pay drawn by retired Naval Officcat who were eligible for difference of civil pay, the bonus in

k question has always been included in the list of emoluments as this was understood to be the intention of the Treasury,

In Treasury letter of 26th June 1920, No.23295, it la now definitely stated that or further consideration of the question, the Treasury are willing to regard the bonus as in the nature of non-effective pay, which should be excluded from the calculation for the purpose of determining the blance of civil salary.

The Treasury at the same time, intimated that this concession would involve the reversal of a decision given in 1914 that during the period of the called-up service of the Naval Officer in question, his civil salary need not be reduced by 10% in respect of the receipt of non-effective pay.

The result was that the particular Officer concerned received a payment from his Department of the abatement previously made, in respect of bonus but the sum repayable was reduced by 10% of his civil salary.

According to the records of this Tepartment the officers

23/9/20

At once

23.

named