AUDITORS AND MACHINES

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXXII, 26 November 1938, Page 4

AUDITORS AND MACHINES

in MofieftN Apart froth the aecbiintahcy profession prdper, diffectors and managers of companies must be necessarily .interested in the relations of auditing to mechanisation in a modern offtc£. ‘ tVe fhink it quite plain that whatever revolution mechanisation may have effeclfed in the realm bf bobkftbeping, rib bbfhparable 3fftibt Has befen wrbugfit oh auditing; fbr the duditoF who sits befdre A balance Sheef pondering the terms of his report must bestow the same critical attention on each balSlhcb Sftbet item whether it is brought before him by one vehicle or by another/’ states an editorial article in “The Accountant” (London). “A fdlltirfe - in Vbrifib&tidtT 6i- Ihr Votithing is not to be exciiied because the bookkeeping channel was of this kind dr of that kind, the question turns solely on the relationship between balance sheet and facts.

“it ts ttaram that machines should be unable to furnish narrative in as much wealth as the pen although, for accounting purposes, especially in certain diree*tioris, lack of sufficient narrative is to be deplored. For this reaSbh we think that, in present cbriditionS, a manuscript ledger containing all the real accbitrits and at least some of the nominal accbunts is desirable. In bin* opinion the mark of excellence in what is called a ‘private’ ledger ife the Wealth of narrative it incorporates iritb the record of the acquisition, depreciation and disposal bf the assets of the business, so that at all times ail the facts may instantly be ascertained without tiresome seSrßh Into the subsidiary records Hehee a manuscript ledger seems to us to be desirable, possibly as an expausiort of rnecHanical sheets Which have already been produced in the ordinary coiirse. It is not jmprobate that these remarks may go far to settle the question which appeals to agitate the minds of some of our Correspondents whether a mechanical is a ‘book’ in the eye of the law. We do not wish to wait on law but rather to create conditions of general acceptance which the law tty ill Ultimately take up into its own recognition, but our suggestion seems to tis to Be helpftil towards an accolrirriodation Between vieWs Which we do not wish to see dfift into opposition. * “finally; the Ultimate test by which an auditor may decide whether a systent a Bar to Hi§ IthqUallfietl approval of a *heqt seems tq us to be whether tHe scheme permits him a twofold test. o<m he first ldok down his balance sheet headings and with speed and certaihty inspect the details frbm which the aggregations brifeirtfited? And ctfiitranwfge; cah he take any given originating document and trace it with equal base through the records to Its place in the final statement of accounts? A system Which gives a Satisfactory answer m both these questions seems to us to be worthy of approval from the auditing point of view; dnd it is because most properly devised mechanical sbhfembs do Hermit satisfactory answers that we loqk Witi?. favour on the continued spread,of the mechanical idea’ t*. 'U.LI J f U—i .l_lL_L_ s