Ferdinand von Mueller

1

Letter not found. The text given here is from 'Board of Agriculture', Argus, 17 August 1866, p. 5 (B66.08.04).

At the Board of Agriculture's annual general meeting, held on 15 August 1866, the annual report of the council was brought up and discussed:

'Mr. Orr drew attention to the following passage:— "The cheque for the amount of £66 16s 6d., given by Mr. Mackenzie, was ordered to be presented for payment in ten days; and, in the event of the said cheque being dishonoured, the matter be handed over to the Finance Committee, with power to act. The Finance Committee ultimately instructed the secretary to demand immediate payment of the cheque given by Mr. Mackenzie, and, in the event of his non-compliance with such demand, the secretary was further directed to place it in the hands of the Crown solicitor, with instructions to take immediate proceedings against Mr. Mackenzie for the recovery of the amount due to the board. The cheque was presented on the 16th July, and the Bank of Australasia undertook the collection of the same through the branch of that bank at Geelong. It was, however, returned, with an intimation that there were no funds; and it was consequently by order of the council handed over the the Crown solicitor, with instructions to proceed against Mr. Mackenzie for the recovery of the amount." He explained that the board had allowed £100 to the Rust Committee for their travelling expenses. Mr. M'Kenzie and Dr. Mueller, however, came to the board-room one day, formed themselves into a meeting, and, in the absence of the secretary, passed a resolution to increase the amount of travelling expenses by £66 16s 6d. This extra amount had been drawn by cheque, signed by Mr. Mackenzie and Dr. Mueller, but the board had repudiated these proceedings, and Mr. Mackenzie had given his own cheque for £66 16s. 6d. to reimburse the board. This cheque had been dishonoured, and he (Mr. Orr) considered that the council of the board should be made responsible for the amount for having allowed the matter to go so far. He moved that a committee be appointed to investigate the affair.

A short discussion took place, in the course of which it was mentioned that Dr. Mueller had explained his share in the transaction by stating that Mr. Mackenzie informed him before he gave his signature to the cheque, that the board had authorised the payment of all travelling expenses incurred by the committee. Mr. Orr at last withdrew the motion, with the intention of again bringing the subject forward, when the appointment of auditors came to be considered.' (Argus, 16 August 1866, p. 6).

Sir, —

Unavoidably absent at the meeting of the Board of Agriculture yesterday, I became only aware of its proceedings by the record of your paper of this day. Observing that certain transactions in reference to the expenditure of the Rust Committee have been entirely misrepresented, I beg of you to concede to me a public opportunity to explain my position in that committee. As its chairman, the duty simply devolved on me to bring the information gained by the members of that committee into form. But, on my motion, the Council of the Board of Agriculture voted, soon after the commencement of our labours, the sum of £100 sterling for a series of chemical analyses (entrusted, on my request, by the committee to Mr. W. Johnson), and for travelling expenses to one of the members of the committee, who undertook for several months the required inspection of crops in a wide area, and for which I had not the necessary leisure. I never sanctioned any disbursements whatever but those rendered through the council in due form for the chemical analyses, amounting, notwithstanding Mr. Johnson's lengthened professional labours, to less than half the sum voted. I had never any other accounts submitted to me as chairman of the committee for approval, and was not even aware of their informal payment, and I never signed any cheques, nor was it my province to do so. Whatever personal expense arose to me in the course of many months' investigation of the rust disease of our cereals I bore out of my private means, nor have I on any occasion placed the board (whose member I have been from its commencement) under any expenditure whatsoever for services which I may have rendered. Accounts of the Board of Agriculture are always passed by the council, not by any committee; they require the signature of the chairman of the council (whose office I had not the honour to hold), and besides the signature of the secretary. Hence, in bringing up finally the report I had solely to deal with the investigation in a scientific, not financial point of view. Of the over-drawing of the travelling expenses I highly disapproved, and took the earliest opportunity I had of bringing it under the notice of the council. In all my lengthened journeys through Victoria I never charged personal travelling expenses to Government. I kept once for nearly half a year my small party with horses in the field for an outlay of travelling expenses hardly exceeding £20. Still it is not to be expected that every one entrusted with field duties extending over many months should bring his outlays to such a limited standard; and I fear that on a similar occasion it will not be possible to carry out similar field operations for the small sum actually now granted by the council to the travelling members of the committee.

Melbourne Botanic gardens, Aug. 16.