THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE 265 
department and financial council, would be submitted to the Cen- 
tral Committee for approval. On the basis of these estimates the 
financial department would then issue orders for payments, and it 
would see to it that disbursements were kept within the limits of the 
estimates. 
At every committee of the front an audit department was organ- 
ized which included representatives of the State Audit Department. 
These departments were a replica on a smaller scale of the Central 
Committee’s audit department, enjoying the same rights and per- 
forming the same functions, and subject to its control. Similar 
pudit departments were attached to the headquarters of the smaller 
subdivisions of the unions and were placed under the control of 
the audit department of the front. In carrying out the reform, 
the chief difficulty was found to be the reconstruction of the existing 
system of accounting on a uniform basis. To bring about better 
anderstanding a number of conferences were held of accountants 
from the institutions of the Union. A body of instructors in book- 
keeping was also created; they visited the institutions of the Union 
and solved any problem that arose in the course of practical work. 
On June 14, 1916, the Council of Ministers deliberated on the 
question of the methods of audit adopted by the Unions of Zemstvos 
and of Towns in respect of funds allotted by the Government. The 
Auditor General suggested that the audit of the unions should not 
be subjected to the rigors of the routine usually required by his de- 
partment and that an interdepartmental committee should be 
formed instead and should be empowered to exercise control as it 
sees fit, taking into account the abnormal conditions under which the 
Unions had to work. This proposal was accepted by the Council of 
Ministers and on July 10 of the same year a committee was ap- 
pointed on these lines and endowed with extraordinary powers, en- 
titling it to inspect not only the accounts and documents of the un- 
lons, but even their institutions themselves. 
These measures helped in a considerable degree to remove the 
danger to which M. Chelnokov had alluded. At the same time, they 
could not but greatly complicate the work of the Union, and, while 
rendering it more regular and systematic, they somewhat damped 
the ardor which the unions ought to have shown in working for the 
needs of the army.