The Globe. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 1879.

Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1548, 4 February 1879, Page 2

The Globe. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 1879.

The Mayor of Christchurch has invited the inhabitants to a meeting in tho Music Hall to-morrow, with a view of considering whothor eomo stops should not bo taken towards raising a subscription for tho relief of tho sufferers by the Glasgow Bank failuro. Lot us consider tho proper bearings of the case that it is proposed to discuss, for it appears to us that the City Council havo not sufficiently analizod the matter before going to tho length of calling a public meeting. Wo would promise that we aro very far from failing in sympathy with the numbers of people who havo boon partially, or totally, ruined by tho catastrophe in question. No man with a grain of proper fooling can avoid being most deeply touched by tho thought that tho culpability of tho mauagors of the Bank has shipwrecked tho lives of many most deserving people who placed implicit confidonco in their capacity and rectitude. Tho misery brought homo to hitherto happy families must, in tho aggregate, bo incalculable. Tho dwellers in many rose-embosomed vicaragos and smiling villas will havo occasion to look forward in blank dismay to a poverty stricken future, and it will ovon seem to them that tho beauty of their surroundings but mocks their wretchedness. Tlioro is much misery in this world, and apparently there always will be, and no largo-minded man can fail to bo affected at the sight of it, or ovor coaso to do all in his power to docrease it. But there are calamities that appeal to public sympathy, and there are calamities that appeal to private sympathy, and it is very needful to distinguish between the two. Great national catastrophes appeal to the nation as a mass. Plagues, famines, groat unavoidable accidents, and other visitations of God, national losses occasioned by patriotic struggles against a national foe —such disasters, and their like call on every true Englishman as an Englishman to exert himself to the utmost to alleviate the misery that lies boforo him. But let us examine the caso of the Glasgow Bank failuro. Is it in any way a public affair? Can it in any way appoal to our sympathies as a community? A certain number of people take up shares in a commercial institution, and thoy determine that in this particular concern thoy havo found a profitable investment for thoir money. It happens to be a Bank with unlimited liability, but it might just as well bo a large mercantile house, a gold mine, or a shipping company. The concern has evory appearance of stability, but tho managers aro not honest and a crash occurs. Tho number of people interested in tho concern is very great, and, unfortunately, many of thorn belong to those classes of society that feel monetary losses more severely than perhaps any other —namely, the small gentry and respectable shopkooping classes. But in what particular, except in that of magnitude, does this commercial failuro differ from any other commercial failure ? All tho circumstances are exactly similar to those of hundreds of other failures of joint-stock companies, which wo read of every day of our lives. The shareholders held shares for oxactly the same reasons, namely, becauso they thought the security good and the interest to be received on thoir money satisfactory. The causes of failuro were exactly similar, namely, improvidence in the management and dishonesty on tho part of the directors. Except in the matter of magnitude, we cannot see that there is one shade of difference botween the Glasgow Bank failure and any other joint-stock failure occasioned by recklessness and criminality. Look at tho misery which, even in such a small community as our own, is brought about by tho failure of any extensive commercial, banking, or mining concern which is carried on by the aid of money gathered from various sources. But should we think it devolved on the country at largo to in anyway indemnify the sufferers for such losses. Would the Mayor of Christchurch apply to the Provost of Glasgow for assistance in aid of the losors? Tho shareholders in any joint stock company may place their money in the funds whore it would bo in perfect security, but they prefer to run tho risks always inseporable from a commercial concern, for the sako of receiving larger dividends. The business stands—■ thoy take their increased profits, and no ono grudges it them, for the risk is somewhat largo. But supposing tho business fails—is it logical that a mooting should be summoned, and tho public asked to make good thoir lossos? Is it logical for tho Provost of Glasgow to write to tho Antipodes for aid in what is purely a private calamity ? If assistance is asked for in one case, why should it not bo asked for in all ? Thoro would bo absolutely no end to tho affair if the principle wore onco admitted. Numbers of settlors in Canterbury have at various times i*. vostod, say in flax, or in shoep, or in any other property ono might chooso to mention The commercial value of tho property is depreciated by causes beyond tho property holders control. They are almost, or perhaps totally, ruined. Or hot winds destroy tho crops of numbers of struggling farmers, But do thes.i .sufferers look to tho public to assist thorn in thoir endeavours to keep their heads above

water ? Of course not They have run tho risk and the cast of the die has been against them. Tt ia .^ad —very sad, but tho mattor is entirely a private matter. Tliey may indeed call on their friends to assist them, but to tho public thoy havo no right to appeal. It is just so in tho case of the Glasgow Bank failure. It differs in no way from other commercial failures. It has no national character. Extonsivo meetings, wo aro aware, have been hold in Scotland and elsewhere, with tho view of aiding the sufferers by tho catastrophe. But with this we havo little to do. Tho numbers of friends that tho shareholders must possess in Scotland, and oven in England, must bo largo, and it is natural that, closo to the scene of tho misfortune men should bo more moved and willingly loso sight of tho correct bearings of tho caso. But wo fail ontirely to soo that it is in any w;iy incumbent on tho inhabitants of Christchurch to raise money for this purpose. There is plenty of misery among ourselves, without going so far afield to seek worthy recipients for our bounty. "Wo say this out of no cynical disregard for tho misery which this great failure has occasioned. Wo give all due pity to the sufferers. But wo distinctly say that it is not a public affair, and that tho calling of tho mooting by the Mayor is an ill-advisod stop.