ABSTRACT
The correspondence taken from the columns contemporary, which we reprinted in our last, will do more than half-a-dozen discussions towards the solution of the question of auditors’ certificates. “Audited and found correct,” is evidently not satisfactory to many of the public, and seems peculiarly open to criticism. Mr. Welton once stated, that he thought certificates should be put in a narrative form, stating concisely what the extent of the audit had been, thus enabling shareholders to form their own opinion as to whether the audit was sufficient, or whether it should be made more stringent and exhaustive. This seems the best policy to pursue, and the practice of making certificates more specific will, it hoped, increase It seems necessary to repeat a warning previously given in these columns. The Institute as such, should not, we conceive, take upon itself, as it has been urged it should do, the serious responsibility of settling “what would constitute a thorough audit of every class of company,” and of permitting, much less encouraging, members to word their certificate “audited in accordance with the form prescribed by the Institute of Chartered Accountants.” But what would be most impolitic and unwise for the Institute as such, to do, may be laudable in its members in their private capacities to effect; and it is in this way that the present unsatisfactory state of the matter can be remedied.
