BANKING AND THE PRESS

Press, Volume LXXI, Issue 21412, 2 March 1935, Page 7

BANKING AND THE PRESS

TO THE EDITOR OF THE PRESS. Sir, —Mr A. V. Winchester's criticism of the newspapers, reported in Monday's issue of "The Press," seems to me quite unfair. What people think is new?, it is interesting news, and in the louii run it is very important news. An editor is no more responsible for the opinions which he reports than for the crimes which he reports. The dignity of a paper is maintained by its" editorial articles. Its influence in the community depends on its sense of justice ana immunity from the pressure of sectional interests. Once a newspaper is suspected of being undei the domination of any particular group in the community, its influence is gone just in that quarter where it ought to be carrying some weight. Hence the necessity for any paper that wishes to exert any beneficial influence to let its readers know in what direction men's minds are moving in the present day. It is inevitable that in doing so trivial and foolish letters may from time to time appear in the correspondence column. But this gives the editor an opportunity which he would not possess if too much discrimination were shown. As to the suggestion that footnotes should be appended to letters (presumably by the editor), this is quite out of the question. An editor has a score of subjects to deal with besides banking, and cannot possibly find time to examine thoroughly and annotate the numerous letters which pass through his hands. He has, moreover, to attend to a hundred and one things in the office, in addition to writing a daily leader or two. The amount and variety of information which he has to acquire and the work he has to do make the average banker's job appear one of ease and leisure. Mr Winchester speaks of "ill-con-ceived and pernicious criticism" as being a danger, but adds that bankers have no inclination to combat it. Why on earth not? Are they so bankrupt in intelligence that they must appeal to the press to protect them from their critics? All the letters that have appeared on the subject have not been hostile to the banks. The bankers have been almost implored, time after time, to enlighten . the disputants'. Straight-out questions have been asked and have remained unanswered: "On being shown this letter, the manager of So-and-So declined to make any comment." Not much enlightenment there!

The banks may be all that Mr Winchester claims for them, and the danger of any modification of their policy may be as great as one would infer from his remarks. That only makes the silence of the banks an evasion of public duty. Vague and laudatory speeches about the banking system are not in the least enlightening any more than vague and denunciatory speeches. Things arc too serious for people to be satisfied with that sort of thing. They want to know the facts, they want to have fallacies clearly pointed out. They do not want to be misled. The matter would not be worth discussing if interest in it were confined to a small handful of reformers. But economic and monetary questions are not merely academic to-day. They affect us all and affect us vitally. There are thousands of men in New Zealand, as elsewhere, who feel there is something very far wrong in our economic system, and their bitter resentment may be directed to wrong objects. Secrecy and disin'genousness are the surest means of fanning this resentment; attempts to suppress it are likely to have the gravest conseouences.—Yours, etc.. CANDOUR. March 1, 1933. TO TILE EDITOR UF THE PilE-SH. Sir,—As the "Editor" of the "Nineteenth Century" told his readers not long ago, great and surprising changes are coming, and I must confess to feeling pleased that Mr A. V. Winchester found my peroration ill-con-ceived and pernicious, for a man who now puts forward ideas which a banker considers sound may be sure he is oft" thc road the nation is treading. . Is it not a little presumptuous of Mr Winchester to censure a great journal for the liberal access to its columns that it allows to writers who don't think as he does? A free people needs a place where its thinkers can hear other people's views and set forth their own. Such a place Britain has long had in "The Times whose correspondence is, probably to

a majority of readers, its most valued feature. By courage and enterprise "The Press" has won a national fame in New Zealand as "The Times" has in Britain; people write to it from all parts of the Dominion —how could it be otherwise? Intelligence, like murder, will out. And what has a good cause to fear from criticism? Mr Winchester has forgotten his Milton: And though all the winds of doctrine -were let loose to play upon the earth, so truth bo in the field wo do injuriously by prohibiting to misdoubt her strength. Let her and f.-ilseheod grapple. Who ever saw truth put to the worse in a free and open encounter? These noble and inspiring words were writen when the King's subjects were resisting his tyranny. In a time of trouble in ancient Greece Aesop gave counsel. I haven't his words handy; but this was his drift. He fabled that, a storm approaching, the oak and the reed consulted about meeting it. The reed said he would yield to it and hope to recover when it had passed. The oak was haughty: "I'll not yield a jot; I've withstood many storms." This storm was fiercer than any the oak had known; it uprooted him. The reed had bowed to the ground, but was now in its accustomed attitude, enjoying the sunshine. Does not Aesop's fable deserve the attention of Mr Winchester and those he represents? In asking this I think I have more regard for their true interests than they have. The mercury

is very low in the glass. Meantime, while all is calm, will Mr Winchester please name the centuries which he says the present banking system has stood the test?— Yours, etc., x March 1, 1935.