| PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
To Te
Reference :-
C.O. 882
1
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
10
in the cinnamon market, and an equally tempo-
rary
increase in the sales of Crown lands; and so far from its having been produced by reduced expenditure, the expenditure of 1844, the last year for which Mr. Anstruther admits his own responsibility, was 50,0001. greater than that of the previous year 1843.
And a further evidence that no reduction of expenditure was then either attempted or in- tended, is to be found in the fact that at that very moment, 1844, Mr. Anstruther was himself preparing additions to the fixed charges of the colony, which took effect the years following, and have been up to the present time the source of serious financial embarrassment to his suc-
cessors.
IX-Alleged excess of Expenditure by Lord Torrington.
Again, Mr. Anstruther is incorrect in saying that the aggregate excess of expenditure in
1845-6-7 amounted to 254,2581. (7720).
He has stated correctly the revenue of those years :—
1845 1846 1847
£454.146
416.404
440,619
£1,311,169
But he has unaccountably omitted to give the expenditure of each year, though he must have deducted it to arrive at this supposed excess. It was as follows:--
1845
1846
1847
£448,232
498,205
11
same period (and separated from expenditure under totally distinct heads, and taken, not out of the receipts within those three years, but out of the surplus of former years, under special ordinances directing its application to special purposes) was as follows:--
Expenditure of 1845
1
» 1846
M
1847
£448,282 498,205
Deduct surplus of 1843 £57,963
#
518,987
£1,465,424
1844 69,442
£127,405
£1,388,019
Revenue received in 1845
464,146
1846
P
1
418,404
H
(13 months) 1847
440,619
1,311,160
£76,860
This shows an exces, not of 264 2581., as asserted by Mr. Anstruther, but of 26,8501. And as it includes thirty-seven months' expen- diture, and but thirty-six months' income (the financial period having been altered in 1847),
by deducting the contingent expenditure of the odd mouth (about 19,5001), the entire excess of expenditure proves to be but 7,350L
As Mr. Anstruther professes to contrast merely the actual expenditure of these three years with the actual receipts within the same period, the fallacy involved in his statement occurs, by his including the surplus of 1843 and 1844, in his calculations of the expenditure of 1845-6-7, and omitting it from his calculation of the receipts of the same years and the error is readily perceived on comparing the revenue of
the entire period with the ontlay,
518,987
£1,466,494 1,311,169
£154,255
The excess, therefore, was
But Mr. Anstruther's calculation is still fur- ther incorrect, in so far as the plausible manner in which it is stated conveys the impression that the expenditure of these three years, as cơm- pared with the revente collected within the sume period, exhibits an excess of upwards of a quarter of a million.
The nett expenditure of those three years, ou account of the revenue collected within the
Expenditure, 1848
4226,185
1844
1
374,276
1845
"
448219
1846
H
498,885
**
1847
518,987
2,105,455
Revenue, 1848
389,118
1844
444,818
3045
*
404,146
1046
1047
Deduct_contingant exjain
Kitage of expenditure on des pinas