CO129-607-1 Enquiry into loss of public money 22-5-1948 - 26-10-1948 — Page 24

- 7

24

(E)

(F)

(G)

(H)

were not defined as clearly as could be expected. We consider that

this partly exoherates Mr. Au-Yeung Man, but not wholly, since we

feel that Mr. Au-Yeung Man should of his own initiative have asked

for clarification of his responsibilities.

We find that an unsatisfactory practice existed whereby the

Head Office shroff, when receiving revenue collections from the shroffs

at Un Long and Taipo, rendered no other acknowledgement of the receipt

of money other than a mere initialling of the cash books.

We consider that when on May 6th, 1948, Mr. Chung Tse Chuen

failed to render to the shroff at Un Long a Treasury receipt for the

sum of $3,233.45 which he had collected from Un Long on the 29th April,

the Un Long shroff should have insisted on an immediate inquiry into

the disposal of this money. If such an inquiry had been promptly

instituted it is probable that a defalcation would not have occurred

or, even if it had occurred, would have involved a smaller amount.

On the 11th May, 1948, Mr. Wakefield, District Officer, South,

to whom the District Officer, New Territories had delegated most of his

accounting responsibilities, failed to notice the amounts for which the

cheques endorsed by him were drawn. It seems likely that if he had

observed that one of the cheques was for over $20,000, an unusually

large amount, he would have seen that special precautions were taken

for its safe disposal.

We are informed that on a previous occasion, when a sum of

over $40,000 was involved, special precautions were taken in connec-

tion with the disposal of the cheque and the conveyance of its cash

proceeds.

In

As stated above, Mr. Chung Yiu Kei had possession of the

duplicate key of the safe in which money was kept overnight.

spite of the fact that it has been his practice every night to open

the safe for Mr. Chung Tse Chuen to deposit his money box, and to open it again the following morning, he failed to remark on the fact

1948 that Mr. Chung Tse Chuen had at no time on the 11th or 12th May,

We would observé that made any request for the safe to be opened.

Mr. Chung Yiu Kei's possession of a duplicate key of a safe appears

to be contrary to the intention of General Order 457, which the