Sir F. Rogers
As this is rather a peculiar case of leave of absence, and you
minuted it very fully on 6011, I pass this paper through your hands.
I do not think however that it is one in which there will be much
difficulty in the decision.
M Wakeford served upwards of 8 years in Western Australia without
any leave.
Governor Hampton then gave him 12 months leave to go to
Vancouver Island (partly in quest of employment) with a proviso that
he should cease to draw half pay from Western Australia immediately
on getting "any fresh appointment under HM's
Gov."
M Wakeford did obtain a provisional appointment, but having
ascertained that his Principal would go back & relieve him [marginal
note: and that he was only receiving 1/2 salary from his temporary
office.
FR], you concluded on 6011 (and
M Cardwell agreed) that
this was not a case for forfeiting his half salary from Western
Australia. You added the remark that by and by he would ask for an
extension of leave, which could be dealt with when the occasion arose.
He does now apply. I think that we must form a judgment by analogy.
If
he had come to England on a year's leave, there is no reason to
suppose that any objection would have been made to grant him the
usual extension of six months. If so, there appears to be no ground
for refusing him an equal extension, merely because he has gone to
Vancouver instead of to England. My opinion therefore would be in
favor of compliance with his request.
But as
Governor Hampton is rather a disciplinarian, it will be
desirable that the despatch to him should make the grounds of the
decision plain.