Please notice the following accounts of 1888 from which it will be seen that they were mostly examined within a week of receipt.
February Account signed on the 20th April, Examined, 3rd May.
13 March 17 April May 33 20th June July 11 13 13 19 24th July. 14th June. 26th July. 24th 27th 27 91 31 11 24th 30th 35 多 "1 19 39 " 20th Sept., 21st September. 71 11In conclusion, I can only express my extreme regret that any loss has been suffered by the Government, through any want of knowledge or skill on my part, but I cannot plead guilty to any want of care or attention. I performed my duties to the best of my skill, knowledge and abilities. Again, I submit that the frauds committed have resulted from defective methods of book-keeping, and through the unlimited trust reposed by his superiors in Mr. BARRADAS and not through any avoidable fault or default in the audit.
I have the honour to be,
Sir,
Your most obedient humble Servant,
The Honourable
W. M. DEASE, C.M.G.,
Acting Colonial Secretary,
&c.
F. FREIRE.
COLONIAL SECRETARY,
22 SEP 1890
7174
13010
257
Mr. FREIRE divides his replies to the charges made against him into three general replies and then answers each charge specifically.
The general replies are:-
1. That with the accounts of sixteen departments to audit, entirely without assistance he could not give to each that detailed examination that would have been necessary to discover Mr. BARRADAS' deceits.
2. That the general system of account-keeping in the Colony is such and the particular system adopted in the Money Order Department is so very defective as to lend itself to the particular form of fraud and concealment adopted by Mr. BARRADAS and to render its detection most difficult.
3. That he received no instructions from his superiors when the Postal Notes system was introduced and Mr. BARRADAS was not compelled by his superiors to keep any new books or open any new accounts to meet the new phases of business and so he (Mr. FREIRE) was kept in ignorance of the fact that Mr. BARRADAS was receiving and had to account for monies underhand.
With regard to General reply No. 1.-I agree with Mr. FREIRE that to make a thorough detailed examination of all the Revenue accounts of the Colony was more than the work of one clerk and I think his contention on this subject deserves to be carefully weighed. On the other hand as far as I know there is nothing on record to show that Mr. FREIRE ever represented to his superiors that the work was too heavy and he month by month placed before them statements which he signed as having been examined and found correct.
General reply No. 2.-The system of account-keeping in the Money Order Office is defective and that being so it certainly aided Mr. BARRADAS in concealing his frauds, but this defence comes rather late. The question arises whether Mr. FREIRE should not as an Audit Examiner have called the attention of the Auditor General to the defective system. I understand that on several occasions Mr. LISTER and Mr. TRAVERS asked Mr. FREIRE if he was satisfied as regards the Money Order accounts and he always said he was. It was at his suggestion that Money Orders were issued with counterfoils and if he found the books defective he should have reported it.
General reply No. 3.-I believe what Mr. FREIRE says about his receiving no instructions is correct and it is quite true that Mr. BARRADAS had no orders to open any new book for Postal Note business. The only book used for Postal Notes was the one kept in the Post Master General's Office which was apparently never seen by Mr. FREIRE.
To come to the specific charges.
(a.) That during the years 1888, 1889 and 1890 Mr. FREIRE performed his duties in a careless and negligent manner in that he never ascertained whether the sums received for Postal Notes were paid into the Treasury; in that he passed as correct monthly statements which were incorrect; and in that he passed and accepted as receipts for sums received by the Superintendent of the Money Order Office for Money Orders documents which had been altered to cover frauds committed by the said Superintendent.
The reply to this is that as Mr. FREIRE did not know and had no means of knowing that the Superintendent BARRADAS received money for Postal Notes he could not well check his payments on that account and that when Barradas... (text cut off)
Please notice the following acconits of 1888 from which it will be seen that they were mostly examined within a week of receipt.
February Account signed on the 20th April, Examined, 3rd May.
13
March
April May
17
33
June July
20th
11
13
13
19
24th July.
14th June. 26th July.
24th
27th
27
91
31
11
24th
30th
35
多
"1
19
39
"
20th Sept.,
21st September.
71
11
In conclusion, I can only express my extreme regret that any loss has been suffered by the Government, through any want of knowledge or skill on my part, but I cannot plead guilty to any want of care or attention. I performed my duties to the best of my skill, knowledge and abilities. Again, I submit that the frauds committed have resulted from defective methods of book-keeping, and through the unlimited trust reposed by his superiors in Mr. BARRADAS and not through any avoidable fault or default in the andit.
I have the honour to be,
Sir.
Your most obedient humble Servant,
The Honourable
W. M. DEASE, C.M.G.,
Acting Colonial Secretary,
$0.
&c.
F. FREIRE.
COLONIAL SECRETARY,
th
1890
7174
13010
257
low: 22 SEP 201
Mr. FREIRE divides his replies to the charges made against him into three general replies and then auswers each charge specifically.
The general replies are:-
1. That with the accounts of sixteen departments to audit, entirely without assistance he could not give to each that detailed examination that would have been necessary to discover Mr. BARRADAS' deceits.
2. That the general system of account-keeping in the Colony is such and the particular system adopted in the Money Order Department is so very defective as to lend itself to the particular form of fraud and concealment adopted by Mr. BARRADAS and to render its detection most difficult.
3. That he received no instructions from his superiors when the Postal Notes system was introduced and Mr. BABRADAS was not compelled by his superiors to keep any new books or open any new accounts to meet the new phases of business and so he (Mr. FREIRE) was kept in ignorance of the fact that Mr. BARRADAS was receiving and had to account for monies underhand.
With regard to General reply No. 1.-I agree with Mr. FREIRE that to make a thorough detailed examination of all the Revenue accounts of the Colony was more than the work of one clerk and I think his contention on this subject de- serves to be carefully weighed. On the other hand as far as I know there is nothing on record to shew that Mr. FREIRE ever represented to his superiors that the work was too heavy and he month by month placed before them statements which he signed as having been examined and found correct.
General reply No. 2.-The system of account-keeping in the Money Order" Office is defective and that being so it certainly aided Mr. BARRADAS in concealing his frauds, but this defence comes rather late. The question arises whether Mr. FREIRE should not as an Audit Examiner have called the attention of the Auditor General to the defective system. I understand that on several occasions Mr. LISTER and Mr. TRAVERS asked Mr. FREIRE if he was satisfied as regards the Money Order accounts and he always said he was. It was at his suggestions that Money Orders were issued with counterfoils and if he found the books defective he should have reported it.
General reply No. 3.-1 believe what Mr. FREIRE says about his receiving no instructions is correct and it is quite true that Mr. BARRADAS had no orders to open any new book for Postal Note business. The only book used for Postal Notes was the one kept in the Post Master General's Office which was apparently never seen by Mr. FREIRE.
To come to the specific charges.
(a.) That during the years 1888, 1889 and 1890 Mr. FREIRE performed his duties in a careless and negligent manner in that he never ascertained whether the sums received for Postal Notes were paid into the Treasury; in that he passed as correct monthly statements which were incorrect; and in that he passed and accepted as receipts for sums received by the Superintendent of the Money Order Office for Money Orders documents which had been altered to cover frauds com- mitted by the said Superintendent.
The reply to this is that as Mr. FREIRE did not know and had no means of knowing that the Superintendent BAKRADAS received money for Postal Notes he could not well check his payments on that account and that when Barradas
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.