CO129-508-5 Supreme Court of Hong Kong- slackness of registry accounting methods 28-10-1927 - 23-4-1928 — Page 15

- 3

(3)

Enclos.Nos.4.4(1) 4(2) & 4

15

distraining landlords and execution creditors of the

sums realized by sales on their behalf, but withheld by the Auctioneering and Brokering Company. A warrant for this advance was issued on the 29th September with instructions that a full explanation should be promptly furnished as to the circumstances which had made it necessary and the liability, civil or criminal, of the Auctioneering and Brokering Company in the matter. On the 21st October the Registrar furnished this report and it became clear that the Auctioneering and Brokering Company with the knowledge, if not at

516688 the instigation, of the Head Bailiff (Hr. A. W. Hill) had been using the funds realized by the sales in question for the maintenance of the arrested s.s. "Ling Nam". It will be convenient to mention here that notwithstanding the urgency of the case (the credit of the judiciary and the Government being involved) the Registrar allowed the advance warrant to lapse at the end of the current year without making a single payment to any claimant. On the 27th January, 1927, the Auditor reported that the total amount still due to various creditors of the Court had been ascertained to be $29,897.45 (later revised to $27,324.23) and on the 21st February the first definite complaint of delay in payment was lodged by a firm of solicitors with the Treasury. A new advance warrant was issued on the 2nd March, 1927, for the revised amount which was surcharged against the Registrar personally.

4.

In the meantime these successive revelations regarding the accounting methods (or lack of method) of the Registry had convinced me that nothing short of

a searching