Sessional_Paper_1893 — Page 558

[vi]

In case (c) he made out no counterfoil nor entry in his cash book, but so far as we have been able to ascertain, he entered the amount in the Rent Roll as paid, thus affording ample proof of his fraud if this book had been added up and balanced as it should have been.

16. The result of this system and want of supervision as to the receipt of money by ALVES has been that he was able, whenever money was paid directly to him, to hand over the whole or part of it to the shroff or to appropriate the whole of it without any chance of detection so long as a discrepancy was not discovered between an entry in a counterfoil and the corresponding entry in the Rent Roll, and so long as the Rent Roll was not added up and balanced.

17. It appears that it was also part of his duty as accountant to prepare the Esti- mates of Revenues. It was therefore easy for him, by under-estimating the Revenue, to abstract a considerable sum every year and yet bring the receipts up to the Estimates.

18. The defalcations appear to have commenced in 1888.

19. The Rent Roll for 1887 was audited and examined only on the 9th May, 1889. There is no evidence that the Rent Rolls for 1888 and 1889 were ever added up or balanced, and everything points to their not having been added up and closed, they have never been audited or examined by the Auditor General.

The Rent Rolls for 1890, 1891 and 1892 have lately been added up, only since the discovery of the defalcations.

20. Mr. LISTER was Treasurer from 1883 till June, 1888, when he went home on leave, being replaced by Mr. WODEHOUSE who acted as Treasurer from June, 1888, till the 18th January, 1890.

Mr. LISTER resumed his duties on that date until the 21st June, 1890, when he was again replaced by Mr. WODEHOUSE who acted till the 1st January, 1891, date of the appointment of Mr. MITCHELL-INNES as Treasurer. Mr. MITCHELL-INNES was absent on leave for six months in 1892, being replaced by Mr. F. H. MAY.

21. With respect to the neglect of adding up the total amount received for Crown Rent and balancing the Rent Roll at the end of each year since 1887, Mr. CARVALHO says that after Mr. LISTER had authorised ALVES to sign the receipts there was no check over him, that the Rent Roll book was supposed to be closed within three months after the end of the year, that it could have been balanced every six months, that if properly balanced it would have been a complete check, and that there was no reason why it should not have been balanced.

He first said it was the Auditor's duty and then the Treasurer's duty to see that the book was duly balanced but it was no part of his duty, that he went after the clerks to balance these books as soon as possible, but they had always some excuse, he did not complain to Mr. LISTER that the books were not balanced. Mr. FREIRE who audited the book told him that he had complained to Mr. LISTER, who told him to mind his own business.

22. Mr. FREIRE says it was his duty to examine the Rent Roll when completed, that was the instruction that he got from Dr. STEWART. He asked for the Rent Roll of 1887 but was told that Arves had to wait for a certain book from the Land Office or the Surveyor General. Then ALVES said he was always busy and he reported this to Dr. STEWART and Mr. LISTER. He recollected on another occasion when he spoke to Mr. LISTER he told him to mind his own business. This was in 1886 or 1887 and he then reported to Dr. STEWART that the book had not been balanced.

23. Mr. NICOLLE, who was appointed Local Auditor in January, 1890, and who arrived in April of that year, says that a few days after his arrival he went to the Treasury and began his examination. He required for that purpose the counterfoil receipt books, the daily receipts, a book kept by ALVES, the Rent Roll, Cash Book, Journal and Ledger. He does not know whether the books of 1888 or 1889 have been