Sessional_Paper_1893 — Page 538

534

light of the obligations cast upon him by Financial Instruction No. 2, but by the light of the ordinary obligations that devolve ipso facto on a Treasurer, by reason of the nature of his office, in the absence of any special instructions. It should also, in my opinion, be judged on the basis of his having honestly, though mistakenly, entertained the view that he was not responsible for the safeguarding of Government moneys in his Office. Further it should be borne in mind that there has never been the faintest question of his personal integrity; and it is also to his credit that as soon as the defalcations had been discovered and he realised the result of his not exercising supervision over his department, he set vigorously to work and has since then done all in his power to repair his previous omission. Under these circumstances I consider that it would be harsh to ruin him by dismissal, and I shall be very glad if Your Lordship concurs in that opinion. As regards enforcing his pecuniary responsibility for the sum misappropriated during his tenure of office, that would involve a punishment little short of ruin. The amount is large, and his salary is small, unduly small, I may say, for an officer in his position, and for obvious reasons it is especially undesirable that a Treasurer should be crippled with debt and under heavy obligations to others for pecuniary assistance. On the whole, I would venture to suggest that if Your Lordship concurs in the view which I have taken, the best solution of the case would be to remit his pecuniary responsibility, and if possible, should the case appear to Your Lordship to warrant so severe a punishment, to provide him with suitable employ- ment elsewhere.

20. In addition to the points I have already dealt with, the Commission refer in their Report to the Local Auditor and Mr. CARVALHO, the late Chief Clerk, as being to blame in connection with the defalcations, and they have been good enough to make certain suggestions with a view to preventing the recurrence of frauds in the Treasury. As the Local Auditor is not a servant of this Govern- ment, and as his case is in the hands of the head of his department, I have not thought it proper to call on him for any explanation, though I consider he is greatly to blame for not having reported to the Officer then administering the Government that he could not obtain the Rent Roll of 1890 from the Treasury with a view to its being balanced. As regards Mr. CARVALHO, I hardly think that there are sufficient grounds to warrant the reduction of the pension that was recently assigned to him on his retirement. In regard to the steps that should be taken to prevent the recurrence of frauds, I propose to address Your Lordship in a separate despatch. In the meanwhile, I may mention that I have provisionally instructed the Treasurer to post up notices in conspicuous places in the Treasury warning the public that money is to be paid to the Shroff's only, and that no receipt for money paid in is valid, unless it bears the signature of the Treasurer (or, in his absence, that of the Chief Clerk) and the stamp of the shroff; to sign every receipt himself except such as may be urgently required during his absence on duty from the Treasury, in which case the receipts may be signed by the Chief Clerk; to make it his first duty, on returning to the Treasury from absence on duty elsewhere, to examine the counterfoils of all receipts issued during his absence, and satisfy himself that the corresponding amounts have been duly entered in the appropriate daily collection books; to habitually take the precautions described at the end of the 14th paragraph of this despatch; and finally to give effect to the recommendations of the Commission with regard to the form of the Rent Roll and Assessed Taxes Roll, and the keeping of his books,

I have the honour to be,

My Lord,

Your Lordship's most obedient,

humble servant,

W. ROBINSON.