The Ashburton Guardian. Magna est Veritas et Prævalebit. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 1887. THE BANK OF NEW ZEALAND.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 1700, 1 November 1887, Page 2

The Ashburton Guardian. Magna est Veritas et Prævalebit. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 1887. THE BANK OF NEW ZEALAND.

The intelligence that the Directors of the Bank of New Zealand had prudently resolved, at the half yearly I meeting, not to declare a dividend, has caused wide- spread sorrow throughout the colony, and wide-spread distrust of New Zealand securitie? at Home. Home papers, more or less intelligent comment upon the fact, ably or otherwise, according to their experience, and some ill-informed or ill-advised leading journals have taken the opportunity to indulge their favorite proclivity and "have a fling" at the colony. It is amusing if not instructive, to note with what an air of savoirfairc % some of the journals at Home, m their absurd attempts to assume a patronizing tone, address themselves to discussing the question, m utter ignorance of the facts of the case. Some of them were not is txistence m the days when the banks had such a plethora of money m their coffers, that capital was simply a drug m the market. We write within the bounds of veracity when we state that some doxen years ago a bank agent m the North Island literally fixed a loan on a well-known settler, of substantial report, and refused acceptance of his title deeds, as a security This is a fact within cur own knowledge and we merely mention it to show how far astray juvenile journali at Home are m their comments on the course adopted by the Bank of New Zealand. These youngsters of the press at Home are superably ignorant of all matters colonial,butin their assumedomniscience they feel called upon to "say something" at|out t an event, which though not altogether unforeseen has yet spread dismay throughout the length and breadth of New Zealand. The "Financial News" — a neophyte m journalism, unknown when we visited the Old Country some quarter of a century ago — thus, m alluding to the subject, states that "the Bank of New Zealand is the centre mainspring of a class dangerous to finance, and the tool of Ministers, like Sir Julius Yogel, m wild extravagance and reckless expenditure which will overwhelm the colony m debt." We blush for our con* temporary} when it has to employ such "a penny-a-line" style of writer as the one whose effusions we have just quoted. It is painfully similar to some of the articles m the Christchurch press. Had the writer known anything at all of the real circumstances of the case he would, bad he possessed the requisite amount ot intelligence adopted a different course. How different are the views enunciated by the old, steady-going "Economist"— an authority even m our youthful days. The "Economist" considers that " the Directors of the Bank were quite right m not declaring a dividend when the profits did not warrant it," and to aay all the "shareholders," widows included.