The Bank of New Zealand.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XI, Issue 1696, 30 April 1886, Page 2

The Bank of New Zealand.

HOLT'S DEFALCATIONS.

The following references were made at the Bank of New Zealand meeting to Holt's defalcations by the Chairman m moving the adoption of the report. It will, no doubt, be expected that some allusion should be made ' to our recent unfortunate experience m Sydney — an experience which canoe upon us as a great shock to the Board, as I am sure it did to the general body of shareholders. I need hardly say that the sensational reoorts to which currency has been given m our public prints had bat a slender foundation. We shall make a loss, but the extent of the loss cannot be defined until the value ot the defaulter's private estate is tested. So far as we can at present judge, the extent of the loss cannot exceed £10,000 to £15,000, and mar COtne to much less. The Bank, m its career, has been singularly exempt from such cases, and it is mnch to be deplored that tlie first serious instance should have occurred m one of the mort prominent and promisinsc officers of the institution. As, however, his case is still subjudice, I refrain from more than these 'general comments on it. „ , - Mr. J. McCosh Clark seconded the adoption of the report. Before the motion was. put Mr F. Cherry rove and said : Before putting that I have a question to ask. It is, whether, m the opinion of the Board of Directors, a man notorious as a racing and betting man was fitted for the trusted office of a manager of the Bank. I have been very much surprised that such a thing did occur with this Bank. A man notorious for mixing m betting and racing transactions should not have held such an important office. Mr D. L. Murdoch said: With the Chairman's leave, I rise to answer Mr Cherry's question, whether a gentleman who is a known better on racecourses (it that what you mean, Mr Cherry ; how did you put it ?) is a proper man to be an officer of the bank. Mr Cherry : To hold tmch an import:- : ant and trusted office. Mr Murdoch : _I may say, Mr Cherry, that the knowledge that Mr Holt was a confirmed better or speculator — if you can so put it, is wholly a piece of information since the default was discovered. I have on more than one occasion personally met gentlemen on the street who have tald me that they were aware long since that Mr Holt was given to gambling i and betting, and so on. I think it is I very much to be deplored that if that knowledge was within the scope of shareholders, they should have sent ao warning to the Directors, but I for on* can say that, although I was generally once a year m Sydney, I never heard a whisper or ever saw an act on the part of Mr Holt that would have led me to suppose that he was not leading a life that the most trusted manager might not lead. That he played a rubber, at whist* that he went to the racecourse and might put a five-pound note on a race, waa quite within my knowledge, but surelj that is not a bar to a gentleman occupy* ing a trustworthy position. But :I can assure the shareholders that there was absolutely nothing within the knowledge of the Board, or within the knowledge of the nearest officers of the bank next to Mr Holt, that would have warranted the executive m calling into question any of his acts until that disclosure. The motion was then put and carried turn, eon. The Bey. Mr Shirley Baker moved that a cordial vote of thanks should be given to the directors, officers, and agents of. the Bank. There had been a feeling outside that all had not been told regarding Holt's defalcations, and he wag therefore pleased that il should go forth from that meeting that now they knew the extent of the losses which the bank was likely to sustain. Mr Baker went on to suggest that local boards of directors should be appointed m Sydney and Melbourne, and also that there should be more frequent inspections, which should even extend to the .London Branch. Mr G-. P. Fierce seconded the motion, which was unanimously adopted. The Chairman briefly returned thanks on behalf of the Directors. Mr Murdoch, m respond* ins: for the staff, said he felt that some apology was due to the shareholders for the misconduct of one of the staff who had occupied such a prominent position, and had been one of the most trusted officers m their service, It was 25 year* since the bank was started, and this was the first occasion on which they had had a "default of any magnitude. It was all the more to be regretted that it should have been the act of a man who, m other respects, was a man of singular qualifications, and a gentleman who had been i able to do for them a business m Syd*> * ney such as, m other circumstances, they had no right to expect. It was regretable, too, that he should have been so prompted as not only to wreck his own life but to deprive the bank of his services. He had, however, put himself within the meshes of the law, and now just punishment would be dealt to him. But he spoke m the name of the Board and also of the shareholders, when he said that there was no desire on their part to import vindietiveneas into the prosecution, but that they would be content with such punishment as wonld prove to wrong-doers that they could scarcely escape the result of their own acts. Mr Murdoch proceeded to say, m reference to Mr Baker's suggestions, that the question- of appointing local directors m Australia had already received careful consideration, and that there was i reason for believing that it would prove detrimental to the institution. He was very glad that the matter of more frequent inspection bad been referred to, as it enabled him to say that Mr Stewart, recently their manager m Melbourne, had been appointed Inspector for Aus. tralia, and that his duty would be to frequently as possible to idepect the various Australasian branches. That appointment was made befoie Mr Holt's defalcations were known. The appointment of an Inspector for London could not be made, but he might say that, while there last year he had made a most exhaustive examination of that branch, and found everythiag m good order.