CO129-508-5 Supreme Court of Hong Kong- slackness of registry accounting methods 28-10-1927 - 23-4-1928 — Page 33

- 3 -

33

Mr. Melbourne states that he was under the impression that

the police must have been satisfied with the status of the

company before they granted it an auctioneering licence.

15. I was ignorant of this fact into too late. Whenever

I asked the First Bailiff about the sales, which was not

infrequently, he informed me that the account sales were

being paid in promptly.

16. I ceased to employ them from the 25th August, having

then arrived at a conclusion as to the unsatisfactory state

of affairs.

17. The First Bailiff keeps a book of sales which he

produces regularly to Mr. Melbourne for inspection.

18. The person entitled is identified to the Shroff. I

am not aware that there have been any cases of a payment to the wrong person, except in the case of two small amounts

to Indian Koneylenders.

19. These are all signed by Ir. Melbourne who checks them

with the writ of summons in the case of executions, and in

the case of warrants of distress the affirmations are taken

and examined by Mr. Melbourne.

20. The First Bailiff's book of account sales is the one

which should show this. It does not do so at the present

moment.

21.

J

I was unaware of this. The First Bailiff states:

"I lent money to them to carry on". The Shroff stated to the Auditor that it was not his money which was lent but

that of a friend.

22. On the 21st August I received a complaint that the proceeds of sale of a distraint made in March had not been

paid in.

I asked the First Bailiff about it and he said

that