B.—lo

40

the deposit became returnable to the contractors, and in order to provide the means Boult prepared a voucher for extras specified in two sums of £75 and £28 13s. 6d. —in all, £103 13s. Cd. This voucher was certified by Mr. Daniel, the then Chairman and Treasurer, and also by the then Inspector of Works. The evidence of the contractor (D. Enright) shows that the only sums due to the contractors at the date of payment of the £103 13s. 6d. were a sum of £28 13s. 6d. for " extras," and £75 45., the amount of their deposit. The sum paid them on the voucher for £103 13s. Gd. was received by them in settlement of those two amounts. The sum of £75 was 4s. short of the sum due in respect of their deposit, but was accepted by the contractors in full refund of their deposit, which they never received in any other way. As the deposit had never been credited in the county accounts, the refund of the amount out of the county funds was a fraud. The several sums entered in the cash-book as paid to Courtney and Co. in connection with this contract were :— 1883. Voucher. £ s. A. £ s. d. 1 Dec. On account of contract ... ... ... 52 ... 357 7 8 20 Dec. „ 86 ... 327 15 0 1884. 12 Feb. „ ... ... ... 150 ... 435 18 4 14 March. „ ... ... ... 179 ... 300 0 0 8 April. „ ... ... ... 6 ... 82 6 10 4 June. ■ „ ... ... ... 99 75 0 0 10 June. „ ... ... ... 108 28 13 6 — 103 13 6 Total ... ... ... ... 1,607 1 5 Eepresenting— Amount of contract ... ... ... ... 1,503 710 „ actual " extras" ... ... ... 28 13 6 1,532 1 4 Amount of deposit refunded as " extras " ... £75 0 0 Contract No. 4 Skipper's, let to Welsh, Davis, and Co.; amount, £1,634 lls. lOd.; deposit, £71 10s. (See evidence of Mr. W. Davis.) This deposit was lodged, with the tender, about the 4th August, 1883, and was in the form of a cheque on the Bank of New Zealand at Arrow for £70, and a £l-noto attached thereto. The cheque and noto wera paid into the county fund account at the bank, no ( t as a contractor's deposit, but in further satisfaction of the rates, amounting to £165 195., brought to account on the 16th August, 1883, referred to in the case of Contract No. 3 Skipper's. The deposit made under the contract was not brought to account in the county accounts. On the completion of the contract the deposit became returnable to the contractors, and in order to make the refund, Boult prepared a voucher in which the payment is described as " third and final paynrjnt —balance, £705 15s. ; extras as attached account, £72 (no account is attached to the voucher): £777 155." This payment was accepted by the contractors in settlement of the balance due on the contract and in refund of their deposit of £71, which was not refunded in any other way. The sum as a whole was £1 in excess of the sum due, but the fact appears to have escaped notice. The " extras " on this contract, as stated by the contractor, amounted to £124 13;;. 7d.; but this sum was paid to them on separate vouchers and at subsequent dates. There were no other "extras" than those included in the sum of £124 13s. 7d. The contract deposit of £71 not having been credited in the county accounts, the payment of the amount out of county funds was a fraud. The sums entered in the cash-book as paid to Welsh, Davis, and Co. in connection with this contract were :— 1885. Voucher. £ s. d. 2 March. On account of contract ... ... ... 236 436 15 0 1 April. „ ... ... ... 14 492 110 6 July. „ ... ... ... 165 777 15 0 Total ... ... ... ... 1,706 11 10 Eepresenting— £ s. d. Amount of contract ... ... ... 1,634 11 10 „ overpaid ... ... ... 100 1,635 11 10 Amount of deposit refunded as "extras" ... 71 0 0 1 August. On account of " extras " ... £100 13 7 5 October „ ... ... 24 0 0 Total sum due for " extras" ... ... £124 13 7

APPENDIX E.

OVEKPAYMENT-TO MOLLISON. The following statement shows the apparent overpayment to Mr. Mollison, referred to in paragraph 56. The sums due to Mr. Mollison are set forth in his account, dated December, 1884, as—