B.—lo

6

* This sum has not hcen " written oft; " it is simply the uncollectod balance. It will be observed that the uncollected rates of the five yearn 1877-78, 1878-79, 1879-80, 1884-85, and 1885-8G approximate proportionately in amount, and show an average loss of 7-J per cent, of the sum collectable, while the average loss in respect of the apparently uncollocted rates of the four years covered by the missing rate-book amounts to 29} per cent, of the sum collectable. The total of the apparently uncollected balances of the four years amounts to £1,508 6s. 3d. ; but, supposing the rates of those years to have been collected as closely as those of the previous and subsequent years, the proportion uncollectod would have amounted to £388 Is. Bd. It seems reasonable to assume that the rates of those years were collected in the same proportion as in other years, and if this hypothesis bo conceded it follows that rates of the years 1880-81 to 1883-84 to the amount of £1,120 4s. 7d., in addition to the sums for which proceedings have been taken against the late Clerk, have been collected, and remain unaccounted for. 28. I examined the rate-books of the years 1881-85 and 18S5-86. The totals of each page were written in in pencil, instead of in ink as they should be. The sums receivable and received were in many instances altered. The names and residences of the persons liable and the description of the property rated had frequently been altered, and names and amounts were interpolated. In a few instances the rate had apparently been partly or wholly remitted on grounds noted in the book as " Eevcrted to Crown," "Only 50 acres," "Valuation incorrect," &c. In many cases besides those in which, as above stated, tho name of the person liable had been altered, there was evidently an intention to transfer the liability to another person, as was indicated by notes such as —"Enter to [another person]," "Now [another person]," "Gone; now [another person]," " Hotel sold to [another person]," &c. It appears that no rates have ever been collected from the ratepayers at Martin's Bay. The place is distant and otherwise inaccessible, and the rates are so small in amount that it would not pay to collect them ; and the County Council, as I was informed, balance the account with the ratepayers by declining to make any expenditure within the district. 29. The practice of the county in regard to the collection of its rates seems to have been characterized by singular apathy, considering that the amount collectable has been steadily diminishing from the date of the establishment of the County Government to the present time. A reference to the tabular statement above will show that the falling-oi'f as expressed in the first three figures of the totals has been from from 172 to 158, 135, 131, 114, 112, and in the past year to 89, or about one-half the sum collectable in 1877-78, and that during the last three or four years the county has had a largo overdrawn account at the bank. The minutes of the Council show that the subject of the uncollected rates was from time to time considered at its meetings, the question on three occasions being prominently brought before it by its bankers' demand for a reduction of the overdraft. Besolutions were passed, notices appear to have been issued, and legal proceedings directed to be taken. That a considerable amount of rates was collected by these means there can be no doubt. The efforts so made seem, however, io have been spasmodic, and the pressure directed to be brought into operation seems to have been only partially applied. In certain rough lists of uncollected rates of the three years 1880-81 to 1882-83, which I found in the county offices, —and which at considerable pains I succeeded in balancing (within a trifling sum) with the total uncollected rates of the respective years, as shown in the ledger, thereby establishing their general accuracy,—l found rates for two or three years due by the late Clerk ; and in another list of " Ratepayers not to be sued" I found the names of two members of the County Council. In his evidence before me (Appendix 8.-G) the County Chairman stated, in answer to my inquiries, that Mr. Daniel, the late Treasurer, " sometimes received rates, but in how many cases Ido not know. I have frequently seen pencil memoranda in the missing rate-book in Boult's handwriting : ' See, F. H. Daniel,' or ' Befer to F. 11. Daniel;' and, on asking Boult for an explanation, he said that these were rates for which Mr. Daniel was responsible. The notes were made as memoranda that in the event of the rates being put into the Solicitor's hands the parties against whose names these notes were placed were not to be sued." In the minutes of the Council of the 2nd February, 1885, it is recorded that Mr. Turton, the County Solicitor, stated with reference to the uncollected rates that " some had been initialled by the late Chairman (Mr. Daniel), who undertook the responsibility of collecting them." In his evidence given before me on the 11th January (Appendix 8.-l) the late Clerk stated that " it has often happened that sums due to the county for rates have been paid to Mr. Daniel in

Writti ;n off. Rate. Total Sum collectable. Total Sum collected. Amount. Percentage of Sum collectable Rate of 1877-78 Rate of 1878-79 Rato of 1879-80 Rate of 1880-81 Rate of 1881-82 Rate of 1882-83 Rate of 1883-84 Rate of 1884-85 s s. a. 1,720 10 11 1,724 10 0 1,586 18 6 1,354 9 3 1,351 10 0 1,318 19 9 1,149 10 11 1,129 0 7 £ s. a. 1,601 16 2 1,632 15 0 1,444 0 6 1,107 1 9 958 12 6 830 15 9 769 13 8 1,013 11 11 a s. a. 118 14 9 91 15 0 142 18 0 2-47 7 6 392 17 6 488 4 0 379 17 3 115 8 8 £ B. a. 6 18 0 5 6 0 9 0 0 18 5 0 29 1 0 37 0 0 33 0 0 10 5 0 Totals Rate of 1885-86 11,335 9 11 898 16 8 9,358 833 7 8 1 10 1,977 2 8 *65 14 10 7 6 0