163
Police Headquarters,
New Oriental Building. Hong Kong.
28/7/47.
Our Ref. C.P.199/46 c.
36
Subject. F`om. To.
Memorandum.
Commissioner of Police. Inspector J. Shepherd.
In reply to your letter dated 21/7/47, the confusion arose between memoranda already with the Secretary of State and your memo dated 29/1/47. For that I must accept part responsibility by accepting from you a verbal request instead of referring you to Government General Order No. 53 and by myself dealing with the Secretariat verbally and confirming a message by memo before I had received confirmation.
2.
I am satisfied that the confusion was unintentional. Your memorandum was, in fact, submitted to the "proper authorities as the main issues were salary and seniority based upon salary, which came properly within the sphere of the Salaries Commission, to whom it was sent.
3.
The age policy was die cussed.
You ventilated the point of the memo on retirement and the data you had submitted, i.e.,
The Commission memo dated 29/1/47 which Mr. Sloss told you he had. also had a copy of Mr. Hall's letter. You gave Mr. Sloss copies
The of the data, including the Special Memorandum in question. answer to your query is then that Government referred the matter to the Salaries Commission and that you yourself ventilated it there. As a result of these representations, I was examined by the Salaries Commission on the subject.
In view of the action of the pre-war officers concerned, it would appear that they have decided to represent themselves. The fact that they have done so while on leave raises no issue of discipline and my memo on the subject was directed to clearing up the point of representation.
5¢
Memo No. 50.
I can find no legal authority for the issue of Special It appears to have been ultra vires on several grounds, The fact remains that your memorandum has had the full consideration of the Salaries Commission and that the seniority by salary issue has also been raised by pre-war Hong Kong Officers on leave, with the Secretary of State, who is now enquiring into the matter.
6.
7.
May I suggest that the extravagance of language and pretensions in your memorandum of 21/7/47 is scarcely justified and 18 calculated to do a disservice to the officers whom you claim to represent.
Så.
Commissioner of Police.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.