nelov uxe
Lovure 6.
429
the first two of these gentlemen for any reasons they might
have to urge why they should not make good the loss result-
ing from this neglect. Mr. Ross was on leave in England so
I left the question of his responsibility to be dealt with
later. I annex copies of Mr. Thomson's statement dated the
14th. May and Mr. Orme's dated the 6th. June.
7.
I then caused these statements, the Local
Auditor's report and a precis of the facts of the case as
embodied in paragraphs 2 to 4 of this despacth to be re-
ferred to the Attorney General for his opinion as to the
extent and incidence of the responsibility to make good the
loss. I annex copies of two minutes dated June 13th, and
June 21st. by Sir Henry Berkeley giving his opinion.
8.
I have carefully considered the various
documents referred to above and I concur in Sir Henry
Berkeley's opinion embodied in his earlier minute that
there is no Financial Instruction under which the Treasurer
can be made pecuniarily responsible. I consider however
that the loss that has been incurred is mainly due to his
not having exercised that strict supervision over the
officers entrusted with the receipt of moneys in the New
Territories which was his duty under paragraph 3(v) of the
Financial Instructions and to his not having conducted any
surprise inspection of the accounts there such as is en-
joined