The Merthyr Express

u_. MERTHYR CORPORATION ACCOUNTS. AUDITOR'S REPORT. COSTS OF INCORPORATION. EXPENSES OF WITNESSES. SUMS WHICH THE AUDITOR SUGGESTS SHOULD BE REFUNDED. 'Ai: a special meeting of the General Purposes j Comu.tteo pf tho Merthyr Town Council on j Lioucuy, tij»-fallowing reportAnd?taj^ {Mr. M.„L). Propfert! c-ii .the aocCfuntf of tho.-CorjjT poration for the year ended Match 31st, 19C3, i was read:— J 'Tc tho Worshipful the Mayor, tho Aldermen, anu Councillors of the County Borough j of Merthyr Tydfil. s -f beg to report that I complet- j eJ the audit of the account's of the Town Coun- cii, and of their accounting officers, for the year ended the- 31st March, 1908, on the 26th Febru. j arv last. EXPENDITURE. The «xpendii.ure aurmg iije. year, including. Ii37.0<33 3s. 2d. out of loailsf and excluding. £ 8,133 6s. 6d. transfers to various accounts of ■the Corporation, amounted to £ 163.373 12:. lld., pa rticulars. of which, under appropriate heads, w.il be found in your duplicate of -fhe fiuanciJ.: i tatenient signed hv me. The receipts I and expenditure under the -sarious departments j during the two years ended 1908. are ".et out hereunder for the purposes of com- parison. | Receipt (excluding ;■transfers). Borough j Fund: 1907.. £ 14,269'"7.s. M-i 1908, £ 17,365 8i,.i 4d. Elementary' Education '1907 £ £ 52,632 8s. I 00.; 1968, ;651.15,5 10" Id. v^Eighcr. Education f 1907, L223 12s. 8d. Other ..hail Borbiish Fund 1907, £ 59,^45 2s. 5id. 1903, £ 59,552 [;.c. 11.21 d. í Accounts of the Corporation acting in the exe- cution of the Buna' Act..?: 1907, L2,293 6s. 7d. 1908, £ 2 226 17s. 6d. Loansi 1907, £ 22 230; I 1908 .B2.801 16s. 5d. Total receipt- 1907, €151.098 18s. 9id. 1908. -0154,103 Is. 3 £ d. Expenditure (excIuding'tranftVr^). Borough Puna: 1907. £ 15,241 13s. 8 £ d. 1903, £ 16.175 4.. Elementary Education: 1907, £ 49.332 7s. %d 1908, £ 51,335 15s. 4d. Higher Education |907, £ 112 1C-. 1908, £ 116 6s. 8d. Other than Borough Fund: 1907, £ 57.532 2s. 2d.; 1908 5^56,929 14s. 6d. Accounts of the Corporation acting in the execution of the Burial Acts: 1907. £ 2,270 5s. 2d 1903. £ 2 223 8, 6d Loans: £ 57.050 9s. 4d. 1903, £ 37.008 3s. 2d. J'otà.J Expenditure: 1.907, £ 181,547 Û. Ojd. W, B163673 12s. Ilid. From the tor"goinp, it will be seen that thf- ^crease in expenditure on revenue account Waring the year was £ 2,296 lis. Id. and the do tremee on the loan expenditure during the same foriod was £ 19.970 6s. 2d., the net total decrease lor the year being E17,,673 15s. Id. The re- ceipts during the year .show an increase of '51.432 6s. Id. on revenue accounts, and £ 1,571 t6s. 5d. on loan account, making a total in- crease for the vear of J63004 2s. 6d. The Amount of loans outstanding, at the commence- ment of the year was 34 ZR5 18s. lid., and ilt the close of the year £ 444.658 8s. Id.. show- ing an increase of £ 10.372 9s. 2d. on the vear. Ùt liability at the 31st, March, 1908, under the various departments is cet out hf"rellnder ;-Ac- soimts other than Borough Fund accounts, 5339,671 6*. 9d.. elementary education, £ 90.772 ts. Id.; purpose.,t of the Corporation acting -in I the execution of the Burial Acts, £ 14,214 19s. *d. total, PA44,658 8a. Id. OBJECTORS AT THE ATIDIIF. The President of the Merthyr Ratepayers' Association (Mr. John Mann) appeared on be- half of the Association to object to sundry J items in the accounts, and some point,; of con- siderable public interest were raised. A de- mand also was made that surcharges should be made upon certain officers of the Council to the extent of the fees and emoluments earned and received by them from employers, etc.. other than the Council, for 'outside' work done by such officers, when thev were whole-time officers of the Council. It was alleged that this prac- tice had prevailed for years. As a considerable amount of confusion and misapprehension ap. pears to exist on the various points raised, it may be well to deal with "some of the salient features of the cases, and to point out some of the matters which appear to call for immed- iate amendment and reform. TOWN CLERK. In the one oi the Town Clerk, it was alleged that whilst being paid an inclusive salary, he drew by way of expenses and emoluments in connection with registration work. the follow- ing sums: During the year 1906, gro&s £ 407, net £ 192; 19(17, gross £ 414, net £ 197; a.908, gross £ 4<5T net £ 207. It appears that the Town Clerk was appointed clerk to the Urban District Council in 1901, at a salary of JE400 per annum, rising by annual increments of £25. to ,54 and in 1904 he was appointed cloerkto the Local Education Authority, at an annual salary of P.W. When the Charter was obtained in It05, he became Town Clerk, there being no variation in the terms of appointment so far as salary was concerned. By a return as to salar- ies and duties of officers, dated the 1st March, 1906 the salary of the Town Clerk is set forth at 1;530 per annum, and amongst the specified duties are the following: 'To prepare and com- plete the burgeas roil and the roll of Parlia- mentary electors for the Municipal and Parlia- mantary Borough.' The objectors alleged that if the Town Clerk earned any outside fees, they were earned for the Council, that the Council did not know that any fees were earned, and that as the Parliamentary Borough comprised parishes and parts of parishes outside the Muni- cipal Borough, any fees received by the Town Clerk from these outeide areas in and about the registration of Parliamentary voters should be paid over to the Treasurer of the Council The Town Clerk, whdlst admitting that he was » whole-time officer, with an inclusive salary, Alleged that the terms of his appointment did not preclude him from receiving sums certified I to be due to him by the Revising Barrister, bad being charged to the overseers, and half to ] the Borough Fund in the case of the Municipal Borough, and in that portion of the Parliament- j ary Borough outside the limits of the Municipal Borough, bis fees were contributed by the over- sere of the several parishes. Prior to the urban iist.net being created a Municipal Borouj'lw the preparation of the Parliamentary lists foF^ {he Parliamentary Borough had been carried out by Mr. Maclure Ph ilips, for which he was allowed J61 Is. per 3.00 names registered. It should, perhaps, be pointed out that as far back as December. 1905. the Town Clerk inti- mated to the Council that his salary should be Ottled. and that he be paid an adequate inclusive salary in consequence of the- great increase in the responsibility and amount of work devolv- ing upon him by reason of the incorporation. j Express reference was then made to expenses for registration, and to avodd extra expense (caused by increasing number of voters annu- ally), it was suggested that a fixed amount to cover the fees should be included in his salary. On the 16th April, 1906, the Council confirmed a recommendation of the General Purposes Committee requesting the Town Clerk to post- pone his application until next November (1906) go as to afford the Committee an opportunity of ascertaining the amount of emoluments for jjeg'stration of Parliamentary electors received b7 him for one year to that date, and in the j meant;me it was decided that the scale of ex- penses was to remain the same as that allowed i to Mr. Maclure Phillips, viz., £ 1 1?. per 100 I uam-s on the Parliamentary lists, which amount f the Town Clerk was expressly entitled to re- f eerve This was not, in my opinion, an un- fML'w-.Qablo arrangement, and would appear to remove the object;o.D rai-,cci, o far as the costs 1 f the Parliamentary electors were concernr-.d. Th Council, however, did not refer to the costs of the. preparation of the municipal or y burgess li^ts. The preempts issued under the i of the Corporation to the Town Clerk, sho'j'd, however, I th; k, be considered as con- elusive. Further minutes of the Genera1 Pur- i ;>o«js Committee relating to the question -were referred to (dated 26th March, 1903, 25th May, i iS08, and 3rd June, 19(8). On the 25th May, g t90o. the Town Council reoeived a statement i from the Town Clerk of tho emoluments re- č?i", d by him for racist ration work for the jj .,ears 1906 and 1907 This- appears to be the i arST. when the exact amount of the etrcau- i TMnis eiraed for this work came to the know- ledge of the Couno l. The it--ion of the Coun- cil, in January. 190 £ fixing the inclusive salary >f' the Town Clerk at £ 600 (rising by annual .ncrem-'jits to £ 7C0) to a oertain extent confirms hf oi tontion of th* objectors, but having re- '3M to the fact that the Council might have the question in 1906, and especially to the minute of the 16th April. 1906, there ap- pe»T'd to be, under" all the circumstances, no ralid sTO'inis for making a surcharge upon tho Town Clerk. On t,ha 1st April, 1908, the, Bor- ough further developed into a. County Borough. ivh-sn the scope of the duties and the responsi- bilities devolving npon the Town Clerk were igairs very corcs-iderabiv increased, and at the .u;irvi time his capacity for earnin HtAtntory ee3 was widened. BOROUGH SURVEYOR. Objections were raised to the Borough 8ur- veyc retaining, for his own: use, considerable ;e;s reeeivad from the Merthyr and Aberdare 'i'pr^ris Management Joint Committee (for pre- paring pUXL5 and superintending the carrying wit of certain weeks) and the Maestag Urban District Council (for advising thorn on *if

Discussion on the Report. It. was agreed that the report be printed and a copy scut to each member of the Council, and that the various matters dealt with be con- sidered by the committees concerned. Aid. D. W. Jones said the Council had never had any complaint about the 'Roman Catholic School.—Coun. SinioiiG: The inspector objected to the way in which the Dowlais Schools were ,taficd, and because we would not remedy it, he ducked us a shilling- per head on the grant. —The Mayor: That has been done in Webster- street School, Treharris.—Coun. I. Edwards: Two wrongs don't make a right- The Mayor said that his name appeared in the report., and-also that of Aid. Morrell, stat- ing that on the 17th of May, 1905, they were paid £5 Hs. 5J; They sent their bill in to the Council, and they were paid. When the bill was taxed, the taxing master, who had a Scale of charges, allowed solicitors about J614, en- igneers :89. and so on buc he laid it down that i he trade to which he (the Mayor) belonged to entitled him to £5 10s. 9d. In this case the Auditor asked that he should return 6s. 8d. He (the Mayor) never knew anything about a i cale of charges; if so, he would have refunded the money at the time. Aid. J. M. Berry was also allowed JB5 17,. 5d. by the Council, but the tax;tig master allowed him £9 18s. 9d., and he was paid the difference- The ex-Mayor was also paid by the Council, and he was allowed :814 2s. 9d.. and now he was asked to refund the difference between what the taxing master allowed and what he was entitled to from the Council.—Aid. Jones: I am not asked. He say-3 it will remove all further grounds of complaint. -The Mayor said he did not agree with the policy of the Auditor, because he allowed a lower scale than the Council for some of the members, and it was not fair.—Aid. D. W. Jones said the taxing master allowed not only the expenses of a person, but an amount per day. wher-a the Council only allowed the expenses. The Auditor said the solicitor was the person who ought to have paid, and not the Council; and yet he (the Auditor) made ihe weak suggestion that a person should repay the amount, which legally the taxing master authorised,—Aid. J. M. Berry said he received a letter from Coun. Simons on the 18th July, 1906. stating that he had been allowed £9 18s. 9d. in re/pect of his attendance in London. He had then received £5 17s. 5d. from the Council: iher-e was a balance due to him of £4 Is. 4d., which was enclosed in the letter. As long as he (Aid. Berrv) was allowed those fees by the taxing master, there was nothing for him to refund. If the Auditor said he should have re- funded the £4 Is. 4d., why did he not surcharge h:m. A-s the Auditor had failed to surcharge him, he proved that what ho (Mr. Berry) re- ceived was legally due to him, and he did not intend to refund anything (laughter!,

-+_ MERTHYR OVERSEERS SURCHARGED, THE PREPARATION OF THE NEW VALUATION LISTS. I I ALLOWANCE TO MR. GILBERT EVANS IRREGULAR. LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD ASK FOR VIEWS OF CORPORATION. A special meeting of the General Purposes Committee of the Merthyr Corporation was held at the Town Hall on Monday afternoon, for the purpose primarily of receiving the re- port of the Auditor, Mr. M. J. Propert, upon his In. t audit of the Council's accounts. The Town Clerk, at the outset, said he had received a letter from the Local Government Board enclosing a copy of an appeal from the Overseers of Merthyr, signed by Alderman J. Harpur, Councillor A. W. Houlson and Mr. Arthur Daniel, against the decision of the Audi, tor to surcharge £50 paid to the Assistant Overseer in connection with the prepara- tion of the new valuation lists in 1907, and stat- ing that before determining the appeal the Board would be glad to be furnished with tho observations of the Corporation. The letter asked why the Council authorised the expendi- ture of the sum. The Auditor's report stated that the sum of £102 12s. 7d. was paid by the Overseers, but he disallowed j350 of that sum on the ground that the salary received by the Assistant Overseer covered the work done by him. Of the £102 12s. 7d., £10 3s. 7d. was paid for books, and J642 9s. to the Assistant Over- seer's clerks for assistance. CUSTOM IN THE PAST. The Mayor said that Mr. Evans was appoint- ed in 1896. In 1901 he made his first valua- tion list at an expenditure of £138. The next list was made in 1905 and the amount paid was J5140. In 1908 the Board of Guardians asked for another list, and the matter came before the Council. Coun. F. S. Simons at that time moved that no more than £25 be allowed for the work, and it was agreed to. But the Overseers said that was insufficient, and another resolution was proposed and carried that the Overseers be granted a sum not exceeding £150. Notwithstanding that, the work cost £102 12s. 7d. Representatives from the Merthyr Ratepayers' Association appeared before the Auditor, and urged that Mr. Evans should not have been paid the £50. The Committee should remember, continued the Mayor, that the late Auditor, Mr. Cox, who audited the ac- counts for several years, and also the LooaJ Government Board, allowed these payments to Mr. Evans. — Aid. D. W. Jones: It shows what auditors will do.—The Mayor: There is a precedent, at any rate, for this payment to Mr. Evans. Besides, the work increased year after year. — Aid. J, M. Berry: And the expense as well. — Aid. D. W. Jones: What appears tc me to have taken place at the Coun. cil meeting was that the Overseers asked for a sum for expenses, and not to give gratuities to the Assistant Overseer or anybody else. The Overseers never told us they were going to give a gratuity to any official. — Ald. J. Har- pur: I distinctly said at that meeting that this money was to be voted for extra services. The officers had to work till 10 and 11 o'clock at night for months. I distinctly contradict Aid. Jones's assertion.—Coun. Dan Thomas: And I should like to ask Alderman Harpur a ques- tion.—Alderman Harpur: I shall decline to answer you. The Mayor said that the Overseers called for £150 because the Council asked the clerks to work considerable overtime, and they were paid on a scale, namely, lOd., 1s. and Is. 2d. per hour.—Councillor Dan Thomas: It seems to me a generous disposition because the Over- seers paid the clerks who did the work J642 9s., and the Assistant Overseer £50 for simply superintending. You have answered the ques- tion I wanted to ask Alderman Harpur.—Coun- cillor Isaac Edwards said the question to be discussed was whether or not Mr. Gilbert Evans was to retain £50. There was a feeling that the clerks should be paid, whereas the head offi- cial should not. It was ridiculous to think that Mr. Evans should not be paid an extra sum' for doing this work every five years, because if he were not entitled to it he was let off ridicu- lously cheap for the other four years. Every member would agreed that year was far too much for four years, if he had to do this large amount of work for the same money in the fifth year. Mr. Evans had been paid for extra services on two previous occasions. If the Council did not pay this money the Assessment Committee could pass it. and the Council would have to and it. If Mr. Evans j was not legally entitled to this money, he was • moraliy entitled to it. Alderman D. W. Jones said this was an im- portant matter which affected the ratepayers at large. The Auditor had said that the terms of Mr. Evans's appointment were that he had to do this work (Councillor Dan Thomas: Hear, hear). They were not told by the Overseers that Mr. Evans was receiving this money in years gone by. They could never get a report from the Overseers. WThat Mr. Edwards said about the Assessment Committee would not af- fect the Auditor's position. The Auditor said it was an illegal payment, and it was not for the Corporation to say whether it was or not. Tbe resolution passed by the Council should be sent to the Local Government Board and let them deal with it. TERMS OF APPOINTMENT. Councillor F. S. Simons said that although last year he strongly objected to more than £25 toeing paid, now that the money had been paid he thought the Local Government Board should be asked to remit the surcharge. When the Overseers asked last year for £150, he resisted as strongly as he could any grant being made at all, but he moved that £25 should be al- lowed for books and stationery. He said at that time that it was part of the Overseer's duty to do this work without extra remunera- tion. After considerable discussion the amend- ment was carried by a fair majority. At the next Council meeting a letter was read from Mr. Gilbert Evans saying that the work could not be done for that amount; pressure was brought to bear upon the Corporation by the Overseers to alter their resolution. Ultimate- ly he consented to alter his resolution, and J6150 .voted, aai s ?vU^g«mnwti§a wjg tc go into the question of the duties of the As- ) sistant Overseer to see whether these duties which he was called upon to do were covered by the terms of his appointment. Some months ) after the valuation list had been presented, the sub-committee brought forward their report, and they represented that the duties were clear- ly comprised in the terms of the appointment, and should be done without extra remuneration. When that report was presented, an attempt was made to reject it, but the report was car- ried. But lllt year no doubt this money was voted Mr. Evans on the understanding that the matter ha.d not been gone into properly, and the Overseers thought that the Assistant Over- and clerks should be properly remunerated for the work they did. — Alderman Harpur: I Hear, hear. — Councillor Simons: I think for this one time wo should do our best to get the ..<ttirch>|rgo remitted. I move that the Local '^jMfcr^meiit BMrdJbe.. askeel, to sanction it. — Aldqmign' j.v^IV,Berryj.'secpnded; as he ihoTigh't t Mr. ''C6:r: ,d%&r>th% 5ii&»irs, was .inclined to tTwik that- Mr. Cox was right. 1 It was hard to expect a. man to work from 6 to 12 o'clock at night for weeks and give him no- thing extra. — Councillor J. W. Lewis agreed with the resolution, as the payments had been authorised in previous years. PROTESTED FOR. TWENTY YEARS. Councillor Dan Thomas said he had protested against this sort of thing for twenty years; he remembered when was charged. He disagreed with what had been said about the work being done at night. The Overseers were asked early in (Hlú half-year 10 make the: list, but they left oves until February or March Trjay had to make a new rate, so all the extra work was to write a second copy of the valua- tion list for the AsdfesSment' Committee. There were calculations to be made, but he contended that the work was dorife by the boys in the ofEce. and not by the sisistant overseer. He hsd- prot0stcd over and over again for 20 year! The Mayor: And yet you voted for it.—Coun. Dan Thomas: I move wo do not wrilc io the J Local Government Board.Aid. D. W. Jones ( seconded. It was. he said, utterly wrong to pay a public offir¡a!£50 for. work included inTiis' ordinary salary. When the assistant oyerseer i applied two or three years ao for an ndvaftcc in salary he represented to the Council that he had to work a great deal of overtime, and i these matters were taken into consideration when they fixed his salary. lie did not think this j350 should bo paid to him, therefore, for work which was included in the terms of his appointment. Mr. Evans had been away from the office from timo to time, and he thought officials should give and take in these matters. —Aid. T. J. Evans supported the amendment. He did not know, he said, until now that a Committee reported that this work was included in Mr. Evans's salary, and that it was con- firmed by the Council.—The Mayor: This money was paid before that.—Aid. T, J. Evans: It is not a niggardly salary by any means— £280.-Coun. H. M. Lloyd supported the amendment, and observed that the Council could not get informa.tion from the overseers, so the Ratepayers' Association appeared before the Auditor, and it wss the duty of the Coun- cil to strengthen that official's hands. If they did not support, the amendment they would be wanting in their duty. PREVIOUS ALLOWANCES. The Mayor said that in 1901 the overseers pre- sent at the meeting were Coun. Dan Thomas (in the chair), Mr. Martin, Mr. T. Morgan, and Mr. Arthur Daniel. On that occasion the as- sessments amounted to 14,500, and the Coun- cil voted J3170, on the motion of Mr. Lewis, se- conded by Mr. Martin ("and Mr. Dan Tho- mas in the chair," the Mayor emphasised) that the sum of £138 be paid to the Clerk for doing the work.—Aid. D. W. Jones: Tho Mayor has been well coached by the overseers. —Coun. D. John He is an overseer.—The Mayor said that people who continually harped about these things were weak themselves sometimes. No objection was taken to that £ 138.—Aid. D. W. Jones: I objected at the Council meet- ing.—The Mayor said that in 1905 the assess- ments came to 16,000, the amount voted by the Council for doing the work was £200. and the amount paid by the overseers £14(). The members present were Messrs. Wilson, Harpur, Berry, Morrell, and Evans.—Coun. Dan Tho- mas: How many clerks?—The Mayor: In 1908 the assessment increased to .18,000. you voted £150. and the amount paid was £102.-Coun. Thomas: And the staff has been doubled.— Coun. Isaac Edwards said that from the first the assistant ovdrseer claimed that he was en- to an extra payment for this work, and the Council had assented to it by paying him. If there was a technical error let them pass this resolution, and get a clear understanding for the future. The Auditor only pointed out that the resolution did not authorise the pay- ment. The amendment was carried by seven to five votes.—Aid Harpur and the Mayor did not vote, being overseers.

MERTHYR TOWN COUNCIL. RENEWAL OF THE THEATRE LICENCE. | TWO BARS TO BE ALLOWEn. BOATING AT CYFARTHFA. The monthly meeting of the Merthyr Town Council was held on Monday night. The Mayor (Aid. Wilson) presided, and there were also pre- sent, Aldermen D. W. Jones, J. Harpur, Enoch Morrell, Ivor Abraham, T. J. Evane, J. M. Berry, Couns. J. Davies (Dowlais), R. P. Rees, Chas. Griffiths, Isaac Edwards, Wm. Lewis (Penydarren), J. W. Lewis, F. T. James, H. M. Lloyd, F Pedler, J. Davies (CyfarthfaJ, Dd. John F. S. Simons, Dan Thomas, pd. Phillips, L. M. Jones, D. J. Lewis, W. T. G. Marsh. Dd. Jones (Merthyr Vale), Thomas Wil- liams, Wm. Jones, Ed. Edwards, and W. Lewis (Treharris), with Mr. T. Aneuryn Rees (Town Clerk), Mr. J. E. Biddle (Deputy Town Clerk), Mr. T. F. Harvey (Surveyor), Mr. W. R. Har- ris (Borough Controller), and Chief Constable Wibon. SUNDRY MATTERS* Coun. L. M. Jones said he had been requested to invite Councillors to attend at the Abercan- aid Library on Thursday night to inspect the books which the Committee had purchased. The Finance Committee reoommended that the application of Nurse Thompson for an al- lowance of 6d. per day for luncheons when ab- sent on duty in outlying portions of the bor- ough be not granted.—Coun. F. S. Simons said it would be cheaper than calling upon the nurse to make two visits to, say, Treharris. He moved that the allowance be granted.—Coun. W. Lewis (Penydarren) seconded, and this was agreed to. The Council agreed to invite tenders for the right to provide alfresco concerts at Cyfarthfa Park durmg the summer. The tender of Mr. Jonathan Lewis, of Merthyr, at £ 40, for the right of providing boats on the water at Cy- farthfa, was accepted. Mr. John Jones, 7, Norman-terrace, Merthyr, was appointed out of 31 applicants as clerk of works for the new pavilion at the Mardy Iso- lation Hospital. On the motion of Coun. Dd. John, the ten- der of Messrs. Thomas Spittle, Ltd., Newport, at £265 3s. 6d., for supplying cast iron pipes and specials, was accepted. BATHS FOR DOWLAIS. Coun. Chas. Griffiths moved that the Sur- veyor be requested to present a report upon the possibility of providing baths at Dowlais. He argued that it was useless for people to shout about insobriety and other evils unless they provided counter attractions.—In seconding, Coun. Isaao Edwards said that the Geliifaelog School site might be economically utilised for such a purpose.—The resolution was carried. AN IMPROVEMENT DESIRED, The Health Committee recommended that in future the time of meeting be altered to 5.45, instead of 7 p.m.—Aid. T. J. Evans moved, as an amendment, that no alteration be made in the time of meeting.—Coun J. Davies (Cyfarth- fa) seconded.—Coun. F. S. Simons said the al- teration was reoommended upon his suggestion. There was generally an hour wasted between the time of the meeting of the Watch Com- mittee and the Health Committee, and the at- tendance at the Health Committee was not what it should be. He had gone through the list of attendances for six months, and the people who rnsiBted. this alteration were not the best attenders at the seven o'clock meet- ing. If seven o'clock were really a convenient time surely more than five members out of the whole Council could pUt in six attendances out of a possible seven. Only five members put in six attendances, three attended only once, and the greater number only three or four times.— Upon a division the report was adopted. THE THEATRE LICENCE, Mr. F. P. Charles (Messrs. G. C. James, Charles and Davies), with whom was Mr. Jack- son Withers, applied for the renewal of the licence of the Theatre Royal, Merthyr, carrying with it the right to sell intoxicating liquors. He pomted out that by law a person who was granted a licence was also entitled to supply intoxicating liquor in a theatre during such time as the place was open for theatrical per- formances. But he was not allowed to supply intoxicating drinks during the day time or after the performance. In March, 1908, a resolution was passed to grant Mr. Withers a licence on condition that only two bars were used at the theatre—there were five bars at that time. At a. later meeting when only 12 members of the Council were present, a. resolution was carried that the licence be granted only on condition that no intoxicating liquors should be sold. Mr. Withers had carried on the theatre since that time, but having regard vo the attendance he thought it was not possible for him to con- tinue to do 80 unless the Council modified the conditk>ns.<; It was not a question of the profit which Mr.- Withers was able to make out of the liquors sold. That was not a momentous ques- tion with him. There were a certain number of people who would not sit out the whole of a long play unless they were able to get reasonable reúeshmen could be abundantly proved by the attendance before the licence was taken away and after. The attendance bad fallen off tremendously. Mr. Withers was conducting the theatre upon high-class lines; the theatre was now an excellent institution from an educational point of view, and it also did good to the trade of the town, because people came in to see the same companies and the same plays as were. .Qaflifft I sad reflec- tion to Merthyr if the theatre were put an end to. He could not sea what body of persona was to be served by the refusal of the appli-' cation. There was not a single theatre in Lon- don or the provinces which had not the power given it by law to supply reasonable refresh- ment. Merthyr was not any worse, from a moral or a sober point of view. than Cardiff, Swansea, or Newport, and it would be a reflec- tion upon the town for the people to be tc!d that they were not to be trusted to have reas- onable refreshment at the theatre. During the time Mr. Withers had had the control of iiie Theatre Royal, since September, 1906, the standard of plays performed had been vastly improved. (There had not been a single ca.se of disorder there. The proprietors of the The- atre were heavy ratepayers; they paid rates upon the assumption that they supplied liquor, a.nd if they were to be kept permanently with- out the licence an a,pplal would have to be made to reduce the rating.—It was agreed bv,15 to 4 ^rotSR to grant the^ lieeqce, with provision for two bars. t*

The Whitsuntide Holidays. Many people at this time of the year are thinking of taking advantage of the opportunity to enjoy a few days rest and change in some spot away from their native surroundings prior to commencing their summer holidays. One difficult question however is, where to spend these two or three days. Whichever kind of holiday is selected, whether it be the country with its quiet surroundings, beautiful scenery .and farm living; the seaside with its bracing air; or the two combined, the GreaJ Western Railway, which is now universally known a* ''the holiday line," is the railway to transport the holiday maker to the very best resorts in England at express speed for the lowest possi- ble sum. Then there is London:- What a world of pleasure the name suggests. During Whit- suntide two riant exhibitions will be in full swing, viz., the Imperial International at Shejv herd's Bush, and the Colden" West at Earls" Court. A novelty that will no doubt be an additional inducement to. yijsit. the city of plea, sure is the running of a sight-seeing motor cat from Paddintrton Station on Bank Holiday, Tiies,Ja.y, NNTednesda.v, and Thursday in Whitsun week for a. tour round London, leaving at 10.30 a.m. and 2.30 p.m. each day, visiting all the principal places of interest, for the modest fare of 4s. The journey occupies 2 hours and a guide lecturer accompanies the car. For par. ticulars of holidays such as those mentioned, reference should be made to the rGeat Western Railway Company's list of special Whitsuntide excursions. The best help you could possibly desire foi washing everything is BORAX DRY SOAP. In packets everywhere.

MERTHYR POLICE COURT. TUESDAY.—Before Sir T. Marchant William* (Stipendiary), Mr. Rhys Davies, Ald. A. Wil- son (Mayor), Mr. S. Sandbrook, and Mr. Ar- thur Daniel. ATTACK ON THE POLICE.—Michael O'Neill was charged with being drunk and disorderly at Pant-road, Dowlais, and also with assaulting P.Q. Roberts. The man kicked the officer in the leg and ribs. He was fined 10s. and costs for drunkenness and £ 5 and costa for the as- sault. Thomas Davies was fined 20s. and costs for interfering with P.C. Hampton while in the execution of his duty. A NIGHT OUT.—Thomas Shean, Dd. Walters, and William Jones, for sleeping at the old Rhydycar boilers the previous night, were, on the evidence of P.S. Clinch, sent to prison, Walters for 21 days the other two for seven days. LET OFF.—Edward Morgan, Dowlais, was summoned for stealing coal, value one penny, the property of Messrs. Guest, Keen and Net- tlefolds, Ltd.—He was let off. DISMISSED.—Jeremiah Keefe was summoned for assaulting Dd. Bannor at Riverside, Mer- thyr.—Mr. W. J. Canton defended.—Com- plainant said he went to his brother-in-law'a house at Riverside, and had a row with an. other person. Defendant struck him several times.—In cross-examination, he admitted he had been fined for being drunk the same night, and that if the police had not interfered he would have fought Keefe.—The case was dis- missed. QUAREELS.—Catherine Evans was summoned for assaulting Margaret Caughlin, her cousin. —Defendant was bound over to keep the peace. -Elizabeth Davies, of Dowlais, was summon- ed for assaulting Gwen James. Defendant, who said she was tempted, was fined 40s. and costs, and bound over to keep tfee peace.—Mar- garet Shea was summoned by Mary Jones for using bad language in Park-street, Brecon-road, and a similar summons had been issued by Mrs. McCarthy, a neighbour.—Defendant was fined 5s. and costs in each case. Edward McCar- thy and Dennis Dwyer were then summoned by Margaret Shea, and the case was dismissed. -Robert White Williams, of Merthyr Vale, was summoned for using bad language towards Elizabeth Williams, of Bryntaf.—Mr. W. R. Edmunds was for complainant, who said they both came from Anglesey.—Mr. W J. Canton was for the defence.—The parties were neigh- bours,"and the *{*w took place in the garden.— Defendant was bound over. ALLEGED THEFT.—Mary McCarthy was charg- ed with stealing a suit of clothes and other ar. ticles, value 94 10a, from the house of Sarah Jones, at Penyd&rren.-She pleaded not guilty. and was sent for trial.. AFFILIATION.—Catherine Sullivan, married woman, of Pontlottyn, summoned Daniel Ho- gan, of Pontlottyn (defended by Mr. Elisworth) to show cause, etc.—Mr. F. P. Charles, for the complainant, said she married in 1902. hei husband wont to America soon afterwards, and had not been home since.—An order was made for 3s. 6d. a week and oosta.

A Heartburning Malady. Plight of a pretty little victim of SL Vitus' Dance. Every trace of the disorder dispelled by Of. Williams' Pink PiUs. For nearly two years, Mary, the little daughter of Mr. James Bum, who resides at 34, Glapton Road, Nottingham, was the unhappy victim of a moat distressing attack of St. Vitus' Dance. The obstinacy of the child's affliction, indeed, was eo well known that when Dr. Williams' Pink Pills effected her cure the event caused general astonishment in the locality. In conversation -with a reporter Mrs. Burn stated: For nearly two yeers my little daughter, Mary, was stricken helpless by one of the worst cases of St. Vitus' Dance ever known. She had been a sturdy child until seven years of age, but then a numbness began in her side, and this steadily extended to her hands and legs. Even- tually she was quite unable to walk. Later, we noticed a twitching of the muscles of her face and lips, and, one day, I discovered that she could speak only with the greatest difficulty. We summoned medical aid, but the poor child fell worse and in a few days the power of speech left her. The twitching of the limbs became so severe that, when dressing her, one had to hold Mary steady whilst another slipped her clothes on. Often she actually tore her clothes with the jerking movements of her limbs. Two doetors attended her for acute St. Vitus' Dance, and she took much medicine, but her sufferings became heartbreaking to witness, and many a night we sat up with Mary, fearing that she would not live until morning. lilt For nearly two years she remained. Para- lysed but one day a report of a remarkable cure of this malady by Dr. Williams' Pink Pille Led us to try this medicine for Mary. After Mary had taken a few boxes of Dr" Williams' Pink Pills, the twitchings steadily died down, and a little later, as we continued the treatment, she could speak again. We kept on giving her regular doses of Dc. Williams' Pink Pills, and gradually all the numbness disappeared her nervous system grew stronger and soon she could keep quite still. When the child at last was able to walk out, the astonish- ment of the neighbours was inexpressible they called it a miracle. i" Thanks alone to Dr. Williams' Pink Pills the St. Vitus' Dance was thoroughly conquered, and my daughter could walk and run' about. Her colour returned she gained weight, and became r_1 quite cheerful and well." The alarming increase on every side ol Nervous-Disorders in various forms arises from the failure of week, impure blood to nourish the system. The fact that Dr. Williams' Pinkpilis for Pale People actually create New, Good Blood accounts for the many cures by these pifla of Anaemia, Debility, Indigestion, Eczema, Rheumatism, St. Vitus' Dance, Paralysis, and the ills of the weaker sex. 2s. 9d. a box, or 13s. 9d. for six, post free, from Dr. Williams' Medicine Company, 46, Holbom Viaduct, London also of most dealers, but remember that substitutes are worthless, and that you need the genuine pills fcwYen wqcifc) to cure yQu. iv

Waterworks scheme:. The facts did not appear to be in dispute. The Surveyor, however, ba:1 obtained the consent of the Council to attend M M-5? pteg, ,tind tiier^Br^, reasohapfifty bo ujrae.-stom) that ba'Vas entiUed' to receive the emoluments. The'objectors, however, pro tested that the Council ha a hever authorised him to retain the fees, and they denied that he had, under the^circumstunces. the right to do •ao even by uuerenoa. The Mayor and Coun- cillors who were present at the audit agreed that express terms .should be made in all future cases to prevent any further "complaints of this kind, and that no whole-time -officer should be engaged on outside work by outside employers without the express knowledge and sanction of the Council. It should also be made clear whether he Ú; to rcceivo the .-iliote of part of the feesreanmfcl upon suc]i;:work. It was fur- ther alleged float the Borcyngh Surveyor took articled pupils into his office, at substantial premiums, which, it was iit-:red, belonged to and should-have-.been.p?id eyer to the Council. If the terms of the appoinfchent were explicit, A-5 they ought to be. no such^questiona'couid arise. UnAer- a-tIthe circumstances, this matter was left for the Council to deal with. t OFFICERS. li, wa.s,alleged ^tftat cnei of the school attend- ance officers ;was :'aotively engaged in the collec of. tecants, ejecting tenants, collecting insurance moneys, and so forth; also that other ofiicers were concerned in insuranc; -and other busuiess matters in the area possibly or probably covered by their official or Council duties. Objections were also raised to whole- time officer- of the Council being employed as presiding ofiicers, poll clerks, and counting officers at elections. The-Returning Officer has the conduct of the elections, and if he utilises the services of any officers of the Council, the sanction of the Council should first bo obtained, GENERALLY ON OBJECTIONS. No 'maia fide<" was alleged on the part of any officer, but the objections were directed to the apparent general practice. That such prac ticos should be possible in a place of the im- portance of Merthyr is to be regretted. Officers of the Council should not bt, permitted to be placed in a position where their duties may conflict with their personal interest, and it may bo said generally that officers of a large auth- ority, at any rate, the principal officers, have more work to perform in their proper official duties than they can often properly carry out. Apart from this, it is objectionable that whole- time officers of a pubhc authority, should com- pete with private individuals for business, and where this is or may, be done, an abuse of the privilege invariably creeps in. It. may gen- erally ba understood: that all the, pa.;d officers appointed by the Council are whole-time offic- ers, unless the t.rms of the appointment ex- pressly rebut the inference. It is manifest that the Town Clerk and the Borough Surveyor would be more than fully occupied in carrying out their duties at Merthyr. and the same re- mark would apply to the majority of the officers and employees of the Corporation. Circum- stances, however, may well arise when the Council may, with perfect propriety, permit their whole-t;me officer to act professionally for another public authority, as, in the case hero of the Surveyor advising ihe Nlaect,g Urban District Council, but the conditions should be clear. The presumption is that the Coun<rl employ and pay their office and other em- ployees an adequate salary, but where an em, ployes is ab'e to supplement his income with- IT out in any way interfering with h;i duty to the Council. there would be no valid ground for su freest:n ? that anything he earned should be paid to the Council. It is quite clear that there must be no secret, commission or private occupation that would in any way act upon the officer or employee to the detriment or preju- dice of the authority, and it is important in the public interest as well as to the interest of the officer, that no allegations should be possible which would in any way reflect, upon the 'bona tides' of any trnhiw.tion. The provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act. 1906. an Act of far-reaching effect, sbould.-also be borne in mind. The matter has been dealt with at, perhaps, undue length, but the importance of the matter may. perhaps, justify it if it pre, vents any further similar questions from being raised. it is highly desirable that the sugges- tions made at the audit should be acted upon, and regulations framed in order to render any further objections of this nature impossible. INCORPORATION. Ccwt3 of solicitor of r— Petition of the Char- ter of Incorporation, £487.1&. lOd.; preparation of a scheme for the approval of the Privy Council, 2701 7s. Considerable controversy took place at the audit as to the costs of the solicitor acting for the promoters. It was con. tended that when the Privy Council intimated that a Charter was to be granted, that the solicitor for the promoters had completed his work, and that the details of the scheme under Section 213 of the Municipal Corporations Act, should have been worked out by the Council and their officers. and that the Town Clerk, as solicitor to the Corporation, should have con- ducted the legal portion of the work. Strong objections to the costs, wem raised on the ground that the solicitor acting practically for the promoters and for the Council, was also a member of the Corporation, it being stated that much of the costs were occasioned by the solicitor having interviews, etc., with the Town Clerk and other officers of the Council when the whole of the work should properly have i been carried out by the Town Clerk. On the other side, it was urged that the solicitor was acting throughout for the promoters (although the costs were made out direct to the Corpor- ation), and that he was the proper person to continue and ca.rry through the preparation of the scheme. It was also stated that the Privy Council had instructed the solicitor to prepare the scheme. The Privy Council would natur- ally oommwicate with the solicitor with whom they had been in communication on the Char- ter. The crux of the question appeared to be whether Mr. Simons ought not, as a member of the Corporation, to have ceased to act when it was intimated that the Charter was to be granted. A demand was made that the pay- ment of J6351 .73. made to Mr. F. S. Simons, being the balance of the taxed bill of costs J6701 7s.) of the scheme, should be surcharged upon the Councillors who authorised the pay- ment, but the legal objections put forward were. in my view, inadequate. It was desirable that the skill and knowledge displayed in obtaining the Charter should be continued on the scheme, and until the Charter, was sealed, the grant being opposed to the very end, it appeared to be reasonable that the promoters, by their solicitor, should have the conduct of the pro- ceedings. The total costs of the solicitor actine for the promoters for the Charter and schemr amounted to £ 1.256, and out of this over £ 600 was absorbed by disbursements. The total cost, of securing the Charter were, approximated. 23.000. DUPLICATED PAYMENTS* Much controversy also iarose as to the pay- ment to certain witnesses-in connection with the scheme, and a demand was made that sur- charges should be made in respect of expenses of witnesses to London:—(a:) Duplicated pay- ments to certain witnesses; and (b) Payments to whole time officers for other than disburse- ments. To put the case shortly, the ori gin of the trouble is due to the fact that the Parlia mentary Agents' Bills and the solicitors acting for the promoters (two bills of costs) were not submitted to the Council until after taxation, and certain duplication of chants were un- doubtedly made in the case of witnesses' fees and expenses. The witnesses (with two excep- tions) who were summoned to London by the solicitor acting for the promoters, to appear be- fore the Committee of the House of Lords, elect- ed to make their claims a^irist the then Urban District Council, treating the matter, apparent- ly. as Council business, and' charging the ordin- ary rates paid when in London on public busi- ness. The Council paid these claims upon re- ceipts, which were given in discharge of the accounts rendered. The then Council had no right in law to make any of the payments, but, having done so, presumably to assist the pro- moters and to enable the, witnesses to draw tneir expenses without waiting an undue time it would have been reasonable to suppose that the witnesses had received all they expected or were entitled to. The solicitor acting for the promoters, apparently oblivious of the fact that the witnesses had already been paid by the Council, included in his bill of costs, which in ordinary circumstances is the usual and pro- per course to adopt, a claim for each of the wit- nesses, based on the legal scale. The result has brought about considerable confusion and dissatisfaction, and charges have been made which would not have been possible bad usual business knes been adopted. With a view of j finally clearing up what has been an unpleasant incident, and setting forth distinctly what really occurred, the statement, hereunder may be of service. The costs of three of the witness in- eluded in the solicitor's bill, amounting to E15 129. 3d., were withdrawn under the following circumstances" Fee-5, etc., al lowed on tax-j Paid bv ation in So-j Council licitor's Bill. Mr. A. Daniel 0 0 0 4 10 9 Mr. E, Morren (11th May, 1905) 6 17 5 5 10 9 Mr. A. Wilson (ditto) 5 17 5 5 10 9 B1512 3 Mr. Daniel does not appear to ha.ve attended, I and Messrs. Morrelt and Wilson appear to have received 6a. 8d. in excess of the amounts allow- ed by the Taxipg Master. To put themselves j quite in order, an intimation should be con- veyed to them, requesting them to return Ve«t, &c„ Paid by Refunded «*»-» •) v ''■ailow'd on Solicitor Refunded to the w1 11 Name. Paid bj^. Ration of in addit'n to by witness O'ncil bv ij Council." Solicitor's former pay- to Solicitor, the Soil- j Ttiil. meut. c.itor. | Mr. J. M. Berrv (17th i\IaV. 1805) £ 5 17 5 9 13 9 4 1 4 0 0 0 5 17 5 •» S" 'Air. T. A. Roes, Town Cleik (April, 1905} 16 11 0 ,14;: 2 9 .14 2 9 .14 2 9 .14 2 9 g g. jj Mr. T.' F. Harvey, Borough Surveyor (26th A •! & 3 0 18 9 9 13 9. 9 18 9 9 18 9 Mr. J. E. "Biddle, Deputy Town Clerk 2 3 (19th April, 1905) 4 7 6' £ £ Qv .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mr. W. R. Harris. Accountant (17th M»v, V 6 H .•>. 1905) 6 6 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S? ;l Mr. T. G. F-vans, Collector (21 June, 1905) 3 12 6 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :| Mr. B. 1Y Kvana, einiilcyeo o: the Council 8 (April, 1S05) 3 0 0.7110 9 4 0 9 0 0 0 3 0 0 Mr. D. W. Jones (Feb., 1906) 5 17 5 :!«, 2 9 .14 2 9 5 17 5 5 17 5 j. Dr. D. J. Thomas (I7tli .May, 1906) 5 it 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 g j Mr. V/. it. Thomas (Am-il, 19C3) 4 13 0 T. 10 9 2 17 9 0 0 0 4 13 0 3-. !| ■Mr. W.Jones (April, 1905)'' 4 10 8 5 10 9 1 0 1 0 0 0 4 10 8 g j1 Mr. Thos. Andrews (April, 1905) 4 10 8. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 g- Mr. John Dt.vies (April, 1905) 3 0 0- 6 10 9 2 10 9 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 j. Mr: F. T. James' 0 0 0 .14'.2 8 .14 2 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 g | f:29 18 11 251 0 0 GOOD r, op. OBJECTING. In the case of T, A, RMS. to place him- self quite in order, he should refund to the treasurer the difference between the sum allow- ed on taxation and the amount he drew from the Council, viz., £ 2 3s. 3d. The net result ap- pears to be, that en the part of the solicitor, there was a dupjjcat.ion of charges, and also a duplication of payment to the solicitor, for the Council witnesses had already received the money from the Council, and on the part of three witnesses there had been a duplication of payment to the extent of 5-129 18s. lid., being the sum they had previously received from the Council. The bill of costs having been made up for taxation, it was only when it was necessary to obtain vouchers for the Taxing Master that the solicitor ascertained that the witnesses had already been paid certain sums by the Council, whereupon he only advanced to them the diff- erence between the amounts they had already received and the amount charged in the Bill. So far as these witnesses were concerned there was no duplication of payment to them. In the case of the three witnesses where there was du- plication of payment, it is to be regretted that the errors were not discovered as in the other cases. They were, however, constantly bach and fore to London at this period, and the ex- planation offered, viz., that they had overlooked the former payment (which was made so far back as April and June, 1905), mnv be accepted. As soon as their attention was called to the matter they at once refunded the money to the solicitor. In the case of those witnesses who had received payment, from the Council for their services in London, and had given legal discharges for the same, the objector had good grounds for alleging that the payees were stop- ped from claiming or receiving any further sum from the solicitor in respect of the same proceedings, and any sum allowed by The Tax- ing Master in excess of the sums previously paid by the Council, should have been allowed to IaPS8' AUDITOR'S SUGGESTION This should, under all the circumstances, it is submitted, have been the proper course to adopt, and assuming that the witnesses gave receipts to the Council in full discharge, it would remove all grounds of complaint if the further sums hereunder set forth were refund- ed to the Treasurer by the undermentioned witnesses | f Additional Amount amount Amount to be paid by the paid by refunded to Council. Solicitor. Treasurer. Mr. J. M. Berry 5 17 5 414 414 Mr. B. P. Evans 300 4 10 9 4 10 9 Mr. D. W. Jones 5 17 5 854 854 Mr. W R Thomas 4 13 0 2 17 9 2 17 9 Mr. W. Jones 4 10 8 101 101 Mr. J. Davies 300 2 10 9 2 10 9 JB23 6 0 Payments to witnesses who are whole-time officers should be confined to disbursements such as travelling expenses and subsistence al- lowances, and should cover reasonable and ne- cesgary expenses. In cases where the Council are successful as plaintiffs or defendants they would, of course, bj entitled to charge in the p&rty and party costs for the time of their offi- cers, which would gc to the funds of the Coun- cil, in the absence of their instructions to the contrary. Although a strong case for a sur- charge had been made out by the objector, it was considered sufficient, under all the circum- stances of the case, to make the suggestions above set forth. GENERAL The defects referred to in my former report were, to a great extent again observed in con- sequence of the last audit being held towards the latter end of the year at present under re- view. It is, however, very satisfactory to note that the whole of the matters referred to there- in have been fully considered by the Council, and that steps have already been taken to bring the accounts up to the necessary standard, so as to meet the requirements and the greatly increased responsibilities which devolve upon i.he Town Council, as and from the 1st April, 1908, when the Borough further developed into a County Borough. J ILLEGAL GE^PENDITURJE. Objection was taken by me, on legal grounds, to the expenditure set out berounder:-15th July, 1907.—C. H. Flooks, silver key and en- graving, presented to one of the local Mem- bers of Parliament, on the occasion of the opening of the Mardy Infectious Diseases Hos- pital, L3; 17th July, 1907. -Secretary, Inter- national Housing Congress, two delegates' 1 tickets to housing congress, £ 2 2s.; 18th No- vember, 1907.—Dr. A. Duncan, Medical Officer of Health, attending International Housing j Congress at London, August 3rd to 7th:—Ex- penses, J35 58.; rail, etc., 23 3s.; total, J63 8s.; 16th December, 1907.-The Mayor, the like:- August 5th to 7th: Expenses, £ 3 3s.; ticket for housing tour, JB3; rail, E3 4s. 6d.; total, J69 7s. 6d. same date.—Dr. A. Duncan, Medi- cal Officer of Health, attending International Congress of Hygiene:—Five days' expenses, B5 5a delegates' fee, JB1 ls. i total, £6 6s.; grand total, J629 3s. 6d. To obviate the neces- sity of a disallowance application was made on this occasion to the Local Government Board for their sanction to the expenditure in question, Imder the Local Authorities (Expenses) Act, 1887. The Local Government Board sanc- tioned the expenditure upon this occasion. To prevent, therefore, any disallowance at future audits, a strict compliance of the terms of the Acts must be observed, and in all cases where deputation expenses are incurred the number forming such deputations should be strictly limited, and full particulars should be given in support of all payments mads. ALLOCATION OF CHARGES. Strong objection must be taken to the me- thods adopted by the Council in unduly loading up the Borough fund account, and thereby swelling the precept upon the poor rate to the undue advantage of the general district rate. Thus, the salaries paid during the year were charged as under:—General district fund, £ 431 13s. Id.; water revenue, £ 1,043 6s. lOd. bor- ough fund, £ 3,611 4s. 9d. No transfers were made on this occasion. The practice should, however. cease forthwith, and a reasonable basis of allocation should be fixed by the Coun- ciL OTHER ACCOUNTS. No effective system of accounts appears to be kept at the hospital. The matter was fully dis- cussed with your Controller, who undertook to introduce a system on the lines indicated at the audit at an early date. This will enable the actual cost per pat:ent per week, and the ex- penses of maintaining the hospital, under the several main heads, to be readily ascertained. The provisions of Section 194 of the Public Health Act, 1875, should be carefully observed in all cases, and caije should be taken that the security furnished is adequate. Thus, the se- curity given by your treasurer, viz., E6,000, ap- pears to be inadequate, having regard to the amount of his average daily balance, viz., £ 10,000. No security appears to be furnished by the Pant Cemetery Clerk. Housing of the Working Classes: The arrears at the close of the year amounted to 226 15s. 9d., and, although the new collector has done good work, steps should be taken to wipe out all outstanding balanoes. The actual working of the Penydarren houses still shows an adverse balance, for the balance to the bad at the com- mencement of the year was 2261 12s. lid. After debiting JB877 15s. 4d. for principal and interest on loans, JE35 6s. 6d. for altering staircases, and I the ordinary maintenance charges, and after giving credit for 21,378 12s. 9d. rents accrued during the year, the adverse balance at the close of the year had increased to £õ()7 lis. Hd. It might, therefore, be considered that the rents derived from this property are insufficient, having regard to the actual liabilities to be met by the Corporation year by year As to the Penywern and Twynyrodyn houses, the former were only let during a portion of the year, the latter houses being in course of erection. The adverse balances at the close of the year, in respect of this property, were Penywern, £55 Is. lOd.; and Twynyrodyn, £ 43 6s. 8d. No doubt steps will be taken to ensure the man- agement of these undertakings being conducted on sound business principles. WATERWORKS. The arrears on the water rentals at the close of the year amounted to 232 2?. Id. The re- S suit of the year's trading showed a net deficit; or loss of £5,023 8s. 2 £ d., which was made good cut ef. tbe general district fund bit trftcsfer j therefrom of £ 5,079 3s. lid. No less a sum than £ 15,006 lis. Od. was borne by this account for principal and interest on loans, in addition to the ordinary charges for maintenance of water- works. The attention of your officers was drawn to the apparent inadequate charges, said to have been made in pursuance of minutes of the Council, for special supplies, e.g., schools are charged at the rate of 10s. per annum, irrespec- tive of size, average attendance, or- ground space. No charge appears to be made for the water supplied to your large hospital, etc., and, incidentally, it might be mentioned that the hos- pital, prior to the date of the last Union audit, was not rated for poor or general district rate. It was understood that your Controller would shortly present a report to the Corporation deal- ing fully with some of the matters discussed. It is essential that the scale should be strictly enforced, that there should be uniformity in the charges, and that eV-Jry possible .step should be taken to pre vent any sowC'e df re>enu*> fFom- Jje- ing..toverjooked. Trhe-.b^lAUcei ca«#%k Coward,, on-waterworks si-ispense', acet>ufft' (p.entwyu trial holes) at tho -close of -the year,vis., .J22,25U. MR: 2d., represents expenditure incurred in antieirationof v. scheme which was subsequently vetoed at the statutory meeting of ratepayers. This balance should now be charged to revenue account., and provision should be made accord- ingly. ACCOUNTS FOR PRIVATE WORK. The system in operation dLJring the year in- der audit of rendering accounts for private work undertaken by the Corporation appeared to be inadequate, for purposes of efficient con- trol. In tho'absence of a proper system of stores it impracticably to readily arrive at the pnsrife 'tost; or the materials taken from store lo.(rriyaf.£ Work, and .where, it goSSib'.e to a-r-five at.the prime cost, it was disepve-red that th-j, .Qitrc*>un.i..s rendered were. aqv.jallgr then the actual prime cost to t, Corporation. The question was fully discussed at the audit, an' it was understood that the new sysrern would remove oa.ll grounds for complaint In future. Although the arrears at the close -of the year, viy. £ 54f-4s. 3d. compare favoura'r.f With the arrears at the close of the preceding' year, bet- ter resu-lts are still looked for. • GSNjERAL DISTRICT* RAfe It is ,Fati$fkct6ry o note that the arrears are showing1' a' marked decrease, tl;c amount un- r_n collected at the close of the year being £57 5s. lO,}d., as compared with £ 390 9s. 7d.. the arrears at the close of the preceding.year. Con- siderable improvements were observed in the collector's department. CEMETERIES ACCOUNT. The provisions of the Tithe Commutation Act of 1878 should be observed. The cemeteries fund still continued'to be overdra wn, the bal- ance at the close of the year being £ 1,177 4s. 6d. The accounts are now under the supervision of your controller, who stated that this fund had, at the date of the audit, been placed in credit, and that further overdrafts would not arise. Attention was drawn to the omission from the registers of burial of stiil-born children, and to the fact that no fees ror such interments (which appear to be numerous) had been brought into account. As the controller had already report- ed this irregularity, no further action was taken at the audit. One or two matters in connection with the scale of charges were discussed with your Controller, and it was understood that the coale would be revised at an early date. EDUCATION. In view of the prospective increase of expen- diture upon education, and more particularly upon higher education, as from the 1st April, 1908, when the Council became the Local Edu- cation Authority for higher agd elementary edu- cation, the figures hereunder, which set forth the receipts and expenditure, etc., upon educa- tion during the three years, viz., 1898, 1903, and 1908 may be of interest :— Receipts. Expenditure. Year ended Revenue Loan Revenue Loan "Rrvn.rrl • — ..&& 2 £ £ 2 March 25, 1898 22,342 2,287 26.670 1,357 March 25, 190.3 30,430 5,032 35,691 5,203 Borough Council:— Marth 31, 1908 51,285 1,420 51,646 9,007 To illustrate further developments:- Rateable Rate in Calls from Loan debt Year., ?alue. the JS. rates outstanding £ £ £ 1898 -222,830 11.35 10,500 32,866 1903 265,532 11.88 13,000 41,373 1908 293,310 21. 23,000 90,772 Compared' with the expenditure for 1898, the following increases are shown Upon revenue expenditure, 93 per cent. calls upon the rates, 119 per cent.; rateable value of the district, 31 per cent. The expenditure upon higher education has hither- to been limited to the produce of a penny rate. This limit is now reached. In launching new schemes, unless there is a source of income made available to meet the increased require- rnents of the Council, great care should be ex- eroiged to prevent an undue acceleration in the increase of the rates. In future, the Controller will provide for the issue of a summary of the various school abstract books under the main heads of maintenance charges, early .after the close of the financial year, which will be of much servioe to the Council, the head teachers and all others interested in the progress of edu- cation. This return should show, at a glance, the average cost per pupil (gross), the net aver- age charge to the rates and other useful in- formation. As to the average cost per pupil at Merthyr, it may be pointed out that for the year 1907, it worked out at J33 33. 2d. gross, which is 2s. lOd. per child in excess of the average cost for boroughs, but taking the av- erage for the whole country it is Is. 8d. below the average. COST OF INDIVIDUAL SCHOOLS. From- the last report, which appears to have been placed before the Council for 1907, con- siderable divergence was shown, in the cost of working individual schools. Where schools with approximately the same number of child- ren in average attendance, and with the same requirements, are controlled by the Education Authority, and the earning capacity, that is, grants or income, is about the.same, it would be reasonable to assume that the gross cost of- maintenance and the net cost per child to the rates would be about the same. Fluctuations, of course, must occur from a variety of causes, but there appeared to be no justification for the large divergenoe in the maintenance charges in the case of schools hereunder set forth, for which tho Council are equally sponsible:— o Om 48 t* r* • d no School g g g | .Jj'5* o | J S §> jsg o 6 £ hfi (a) Mixed and infante .709 1,375 38 643 2,056 (b) Boys, girls c, and infants 646 1,119 16 — 1,145 (c) Mixed and infants $ 1,029 36 474 1,539 It will be observed that in the case of one school three departments the authority can maintain an efficient elemen- tary school without any supplement from the rates, whereas, in the other cases, a substantial sum has been drawn from. the rates. Put in another, way, the average gross cost per child for the, year is:—School A; £ 2.90, or B2 18s. school B, £ 1.75,or El 15s. Id. school C, £ 2.89, or L2 17s. lOd. For the year ended the 31st March, 1907, the authority.; do not appear to have expended upon the non-provided schools the, income derived from Government grants and endowments due to these schools, for there was an apparent surplus of J6204 on the year's working. If some of the schools can be main- tained without recourse to the rates, there is good ground for alleging that considerable econ- omies could be effected in other schools main- tained by the Council which appear to require substantial subventions from the rates year bv year. Complaints were made of gross unfairness in the allocation of the education funds, of pre- ferential treatment, and so forth, and an exam- ination of the accounts would appear to justify some of the complaints. Since the appointed day, however, the Council appear to have done a great deal to improve the position of some of the schools, and further comments are reserved. attention was drawn to the defective allocations made in several of the charges, and the in- structions given at the audit should be carefully noted. Sundry stale accounts had been paid during the year, and attention is again drawn to the provisions of Section 210 of the Public Health Act, 1875. An examination of the teachers' salary sheets revealed several miss- ing receipts and also unstamped receipts. In one case no receipts for JB69 9s. 10d (the salaries of one department) were produced at the audit, but at my request all the required signatures were, obtained excepting those who had left the district, when an indemnity was given by the head teacher. Greater care should be exercised in future. The present practice of paying sal- aries appears to be as follows:-All salaries are. paid by the head teacher, who, upon application at the Town Hall obtains a cheque payable to self for the departments under his or her con- trol. In some cases the cheque is sent by post. It was stated at the audit that in certain in- stances the head teachers send some person on their behalf to obtain the cheques. The head teachers give no security, and although the pre- sent system appears to work very well, the Cor- poration should consider the question of legal liability in the event of a cheque being mis- appropriated either in transit or otherwise. The stock and stores accounts again called for comment-, and greater supervision should be exercised with a view to preventing the ap- parent discrepancies pointed out at the audit. The methods in vogue of recording and con- trolling the letting of schools are highly un- satisfactory and call for immediate reform. If the practice outlined and discussed at the audit is adopted, your Controller will then be in a' position to see that possible soiirces of revenue from such lettings are recovered. At present, through want of co-operation, he is not in that position. A scale should be settled and uniform rates charged. Attention was dra.wn to the fact that no receipts appeared to have been obtained for the letting of schools as i polling stations for election purposes. As there is no reason why the borough fund should bene- fit at the expense of the education fund, it is desirable that in future the education fund should be recouped with an amount sufficient to cover the cost of heating and lighting the'rooms let for this purpose. The sundry debtors' ledger, when, fiat .pr"J .to 1r.M k!i ia pencil, and the arrears were not summarised, j Some of the cases in arrear call for severe com- ment, e.g., page 34: Contribution toward child at Boston Spa (order Is. 6d. per week), arrears at 31st March, 1908, B5 lis. (represents 47 weeks); page 36, order Is. per week, arrears at 31st March, 1903, 14s. (represents 14 weeks); page 29, order 4s. per week, arrears at 31st March, 1908, £ 4 16s. (represents 24 weeks). CONCLUSION. Numerous matters of derail were discussed with your officers. My special thanks are due to the Borough Controller for the excellent arrangements made for the audit, and to all the officers, of the corporation with whom I came in contact for their courtesy and prompt attention. The special interest taken in the accounts by the ex-Mayor, and, I believe, all the members of the Corporation, is most en- couraging, and will, it is hoped, at an early date, with efficient the desired result, viz., sound financial control with a system of accounts ^^o £ t^ to^fjgne i^ie Principality. It only remafns* ror me to' dra\V"f! your attention to my certificate, written at the ioot of tho balance sheet in your general ledger. —I am, gentlemen, your obedient servant, M. D. PROPERT, District Auditor Newport, Mon., 17th April, 1909.