CO129-508-5 Supreme Court of Hong Kong- slackness of registry accounting methods 28-10-1927 - 23-4-1928 — Page 70

11 -

Registrar to the Deputy Registrar.

Therefore in the absence of any specific

70

intimation to the Registrar that moneys were not being paid

in promptly he could not be expected to keep an independert

check thereon.

Mr. Nisbet states that on two or three occasions during the two months prior to the 21st August, 1926, complaints (probably written) were made to him as to the delay in paying out after sales. In these cases he spoke to the First Bailiff and was told by him that it had been

tob necessary to given credit to purchasers.

In August he told

the First Bailiff that credit must not be given.

The Committee does not feel that the small number

of complaints received by Mr. Nisbet was sufficient to put him on his enquiry as to the receipt of the generality of the proceeds of sale.

Mr. Melbourne, the person to whom the Registrar delegated the duty of the supervision of accounts, expresses his view of the responsibility for seeing that the proceeds of sales are paid in in the following words:-

"It is the duty of the Bailiff to conduct all sales, to note the dates and when the net proceeds are paid into Court. He is the only person who can check the

auctioneer. He knows what goods are to be sold, he should be represented at the auction and should see

that the procceds of sale are paid in."

This appears to express correctly the First Bailiff's

duties, but there must remain with the person to whom the supervision of the accounts is delegatedthe responsibility for taking action to remedy any neglect of duty on the part of the person keeping the accounts and any delay or default

in payment disclosed by those accounts.

Mr. Melbourne states that he saw the Distraint Book

nearly every day. He says that the net proceeds should be

posted

Page 70Page 71