203

poses on the Superintendent\'s warrant. And
here it may be observed that Mr. M\'Glashan
kept no private account at the Bank, and that
the Superintendent was aware of it. Mr.
M\'Glashan states that he kept his private
funds in the office, and that he had generally
£50 or £100 of his own in the chest.

On reviewing the evidence up to this point,
it is found, that the Superintendent in his
letter to the Governor states that he had for
years been finding the means for making up
the Provincial Treasurer\'s deficiencies. In
the month of June 1859, the Superintendent
assisted him with a loan of £500, holding, as
collateral security, Mr. M\'Glashan\'s cattle for
sale. This loan was repaid by Mr. M\'Glashan
in November 1859. On the 28th February
we have seen that the Superintendent owed
the Treasurer £486 13s. 4d. Now could the
Superintendent on the 10th March following
reasonably suppose that the Treasurer in his
surer could, under these circumstances, at a
moment\'s notice and at the public offices, lend
£600 in cash out of his private funds? But
further, it is found, that, apparently on the
day on which the money was advanced, and
the time when the Treasurer held a con-
siderable balance of Education funds in his
hands, the Superintendent\'s warrant for £600
for Education purposes was issued to the
Provincial Treasurer.

The whole of these circumstances are against
the conclusion which the Superintendent seeks
to establish that the £600 was lent to him
from private funds.

The Superintendent states in explanation
that the Treasurer, whenever he required
that on account of Education, sent in a slip
of paper, stating that the sum named therein
was required by him as Treasurer of Education
Board, and, as a matter of course, a warrant
was invariably issued without further enquiry.
The fact of the Treasurer having lent him a
sum of money of the same amount and on the
same day (if it was so) is a singular coinci-
dence, but nothing more. The Superintendent
further states, \"As to my reasonably supposing
\"that the Treasurer was in a position to ad-
\"vance this money at the time out of his pri-
\"vate funds, it certainly does seem improbable
\"now that the whole facts and circumstances
\"of the case are disclosed; at the same time,
\"whether I did give the matter much
\"consideration aware that he had pri-
\"vate funds passing through his hands.
\"Among others, I may state, that he showed
\"me an authority to draw on a client in Edin-
\"burgh for, 1 think, £500, which I offered to
\"negotiate, but which, I presume, he nego-
\"tiated otherwise. I also understood that
\"monies were being lent at mortgage by Mr.
\"M\'Glashan on behalf of clients. One per-
\"son, who, if I recollect rightly, told me that
\"he had been in treaty with Mr. M\'Glashan
\"in this way, was Mr. Jones, of Jones and
\"Williamson.\"

This evidence as to the mortgage and the
power to draw on Edinburgh is not contra-
dicted by Mr. M\'Glashan, except that he ex-
plains that in neither of the cases did any
money pass through his hands.

Next as to the facts which have been as-
certained relative to the charge made by the
Provincial Council, that the Superintendent
was for a considerable time aware of their
being a deficiency in the Public Funds, with-
out having made the members of his Execu-
tive acquainted with it.

The Superintendent admits that when, prior
to the June audit, Mr. M\'Glashan revealed to
him as he says, the state of affairs, he ought to
have taken action on the matter; but his
excuse is, that his regard for Mr. M\'Glashan
prompted him to shield him from ruin; that
Mr. M\'Glashan has a large and helpless family
dependent upon him for support; that his
zealous and laborious services in Britain to-
wards the interests of the Province, as the
Secretary of the Otago Association, gave him
strong claims for protection.

In connection with this part of the enquiry,
the Superintendent seems anxious to put it in
evidence that on several occasions he had
made good Mr. M\'Glashan\'s deficiency. But
if he had done so, he was the more bound to
protect the Public Chest by instructions for
tions for the whole of the Public Monies being
simultaneously verified quarterly by a Board
of Survey, and he states, that the Trea-
surer would be likely to use the Road money
and the Education money rather than allow
his deficiencies to be exposed. Instead of doing
so when he came into office, we find him bor-
rowing large sums of money from the Treasurer.

In reference to the deficiency on the 30th
June, 1860, reported by the Auditors on the
4th September following, and to the official
letter of the 20th September, 1860, it appears
in evidence that on or after the 25th October
the Superintendent states officially in his me-
morandum on the Auditors\' Report that the
deficiency of the 30th June, 1860, is easily
accounted for, from the mode in which many
payments had been entered not to refund large
had hitherto been made. Yet, at the time he
wrote this, he knew that the Provincial Trea-
surer was a defaulter; the Provincial Trea-
surer had in the official letter of the 20th
September, 1860, accused him of having the
deficient balance in his own hands. The
Superintendent in his explanations endeavours
to clear himself of an attempt to mislead, by
asserting that his authority for what he stated
was the Provincial Treasurer. But it is
manifest that this, if there could be no pal-
liation, for it was impossible to mislead him as
to the facts that the deficiency was real, and
that he himself had been compelled, from the
course taken by the Treasurer, to refund large
sums of money to make it good. These facts
are beyond all controversy, and the evidence
shows that the Superintendent had an over-
whelming interest in concealing them; and
that his own pecuniary embarrassments alone
prevented his doing so. He writes in one of
his notes, \"I think I will manage by hook or
\"crook to get Proudfoot\'s bill cashed on Mon-
\"day. I have made a great sacrifice in order
\"to close this to me more unpleasant business
\"than it can be ever to you, and it will cer-
\"tainly be strange if the sum named cannot
\"be realized.\"

The notes in the handwriting of Mr. Mac-
andrew are important, and place his conduct
in a peculiar light, and manifestly show that
he was actuated by other motives than a mere
desire to shield the Provincial Treasurer.
Unless he believed himself seriously mixed up
tion, he could never have used the expressions
or would have taken the course he did. Thus,
when he learned that the Provincial Treasurer
had disclosed the affair to the Auditor, he