I must say that my notions of public business and above all of public business where public money is concerned, differ very widely from the Rev. Bursar’s. Every man who contracts with the public ought to remember the terms of his contract; and, if he forgets those terms, he must suffer for his negligence. I may be sorry that any portion of the loss should fall on the college or on the Principal. But I am not their agent. I am an agent for the public. And as such I am to determine whether the public shall pay four times as much as it is bound to pay merely because a gentleman tells me that he forgot the terms of the contract. If we accept so ridiculous an excuse, I feel convinced that the Governor General in Council will not accept it. We shall only injure our own character with the Government by our laxity, we shall not serve Dr. Mill in the least.
I have a great respect for Dr. Mill’s character, both moral and intellectual; and I should gladly see the patronage of Government extended, in a proper manner, to so distinguished a scholar. But I cannot agree with Mr. Sutherland in thinking that all the rules established for the purpose of preventing jobbing and profusion are to be dispensed with in compliment to Dr. Mill’s learning and talents. What is the use of requiring estimates? Why should we go through so tedious a form, if, as Mr. Holmes says, we are, in spite of the terms of the estimate, bound in good faith to allow those whom we employ to dip as deep into the public purse as they chuse. (Sic.). If the estimate had been exceeded by a few hundred rupees, we might have shewn indulgence. But we are called on to pay for a part of the work nearly four times as much as we engaged to pay for the whole. I cannot conscientiously recommend the claim to the Government.—[Book G. page 89.] 6th August, 1835.
Decision concerning the Bishop’s College Press Bill.— Mr. Bushby takes a middle course, and votes for paying part of the excess, and not the whole. The votes therefore stand thus. On the question of paying for the second delivery there are 8 for paying, and 6 against it. On the question of paying for the third delivery we are 7 to 7.
The Government ought, I think, in a case in which such a difference of opinion exists to see all the papers.—[Book G. page 101.] 21st August, 1835.
[This question occasioned much discussion in the Committee, as the work was allowed to have been cheaply executed at the price demanded. In favor of payment for the second and third parts were,—The Hon’ble H. Shakespear, J. R. Colvin,
