The Laboratory Deficit

Without giving in detail the two reporta of the Regents'investigating committee, which, failing to agree with themselves and treating balances as receipts, misload the reader uniuitiated in book-keeping, we content ourselves witli giving the suminaiized statement of mouey8 which the committee found by the hocica Dr. Dougliis ought to have received and which in his settlement lis had reported as receiving. It is : Receipts Receipts as as per DeftcU as fomid by Dr. Douglas' fo'uitd bi) cominiWe. annuulrepvrts. committre 186J-5 - - 82,108 25 $2,051 23 SÖÖ 00 1865-6 - - - 2,928 52 2,752 33 169 71 18B;-7 - - 4,232 89 4,124 53 74 61 1867-8 ... 3,384 50 3,8:!2 00 201 20 186K-9 - - 5,378 15 4,944 15 449 10 186Ü-70 - - - 4,209 37 a.'AO 87 676 00 187(1-1 - - 4,306 66 3,53ti 5 88.5 51 1871-2 --- 4,280 86 3,468 71 842 75 1872-3 - - 4,843 70 3,555 35 1,129 15 187"-4 - - - 4,915 15 3,814 10 1,298 80 1874-5 ... (j,248 78 4882 87 1,418 68 Totals, - $47,486 80 $40,502 79 $7,170 51 In 1870-1 there ia au excess in favor of Dr Dr. Douglas of Í98 45 ; in 1871-2, an exccas of $33 25 and in 1873-i of $54 80- (otal, $186 50. This note tootíng of $186 50 deducted f rom the total of the above deficit column leaves a net ileflcit of J6.984 01, tne amouut found by the minority report of Regent S. S. Walker, and one of the amounts also given in the mijority report. With this brief statement we wait the result of the further investigation ordered : adding ouly that we have reasou to bolieve the defi:iency is .,ver-stated. A little " doublé ntry " we suspect, charging unsettled accounts into the receipts of one year and repeating the charge when paid, aud other palpable blunders.