The Ashburton Guardian. Magna est Veritas et Prævalebit. TUESDAY, JULY 10, 1888. THE DISALLOWED ACCOUNTS

Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 1889, 10 July 1888, Page 2

The Ashburton Guardian. Magna est Veritas et Prævalebit. TUESDAY, JULY 10, 1888. THE DISALLOWED ACCOUNTS

At last night's meeting of the Borough Council the matter of the disallowed accounts was brought under its notice by the Audit Department, and perhaps the Council was wise m the stand it took, though we question very much its legality; The Audit Department, we take it, is constituted for a special purpose, and has under it many able officers, whose duty it is to see that monies paid away are m strict accordance with the A ct. So far as we know there has never been a case where the Audit Department has been compelled to force its ruling and demand a refund of public money improperly expended. At Wanganui recently exception was taken to the Education Board there expending money on medals for distribution, when the Act only allowed certificates, and tho Crown law officers were at one with the Audit Department, but the matter we believe was got over by the Cabinet making special provision by placing a sum equal to the amount" expended on the Supplementary Estii mates. It cannot be denied that the £10 disallowed for Mr Sealy's attendance at the Municipal Conference was money spent m the interests of the burgesses, but as to the other amounts the same cannot so truly be said. The Mayor's idea, to pay thirty shillings each and end the matter, was a generous and practical one. Jt woql4 have solved all the difficulties, and brought peace to the Council. At the same time if Councillors think they are being unfairly dealt with it is well they should see to the bottom of it, We should not like to see the suggestion earned out, that the Mayor should he voted an amount equal to the sum disallowed. It would be far better to pay the amount individually than resort to such a means ofliquidatingthedisallowance. Should the Audit Department) insist on its demand being complied with, and jthe Council as firmly refuse to yield, a dragging of the matter before the Court cannot but follow, and the judgment when it does comes will be something to look back upon. It does not, however, matter which way the case will go, individual inconvenience and public expense will be entailed, The matter will not be fought out for nothing, awl eyeu jf j;he Council wins it will only have the satisfaction of establishing a prtjeedent. It will be none the richer, and if the case goes with the Audit Department the disallowed items will be largely added to.