month, that
my
Sasserted that
statement was correct when.. on examination of the Books
in this Department and in the Audit Office
at hong kong it appeared," "from 1884 to 1888
a separate account has been kept of any Parliamentary Grants in aid of the Colonial Revenue distinct from those sums required
for the maintenance of the Diplomatic and..
Consular Services
in
China.
during that period.
16th
Mr. Macaulay's letter of the 14th Sept last
and the Auditor General's letters of the 25th June 1888 and 13th January 1889 [Copied herewith transmitted] may satisfy Mr. E. B. Lytton that there were no grounds for apprehending any confusion in the Public Accounts of this Colony.
In further consideration of the whole matter I entertain also a hope that Sir E. B. Lytton will not attribute to me any "professed ignorance" [or to any one here tolerance of such ignorance] on the subject of the accounts dealt with in the letter and statement referred to, may arrive at the conclusion that I have acted with perfect good faith throughout the whole transaction.
6. The Commissioners of Audit in the 4th paragraph of Mr. Macaulay's letter to me have been pleased to observe that they were not aware how I had arrived at a balance of £3,941-18-2 on the 12th January 1888, as stated in my account when the balance of the Hongkong account was on the 31st Dec 1887 £8082-18-5.
7. My explanation is that instructions were to shew the balance available for colonial purposes. I therefore left out of my calculations the sum of £4320-10-5 to the credit of the Diplomatic & Consular service in the Colonial Bank as shown in the proceedings of a Board of Survey held on the 5th January 1888, herewith transmitted. The balance in the Colonial Chest on the 31st Dec was £29,41-15-2. In the Bank of Credit & Consular Services » £4320-10-5 = £2,262-43-2/4 (referred to being...