BANK OF NEW ZEALAND. London, December 1.

Te Aroha News, Volume VI, Issue 332, 9 January 1889, Page 4

BANK OF NEW ZEALAND. London, December 1.

''Tkiith, ' commenting on the report of the Committee of investigation, says :—: — " The_ report of the committee of in\estigabion appointed by the sharcholdeis of Llio Bank of New Zealand has jusc been published in the " financial News-," and it . would appear fiom that document that the I directors have nob >et made a clean breast of all that the shareholders ought bo know. Thus, it is stated in the report that the | advances have been made to tome of the j directors upon ineiiicientsecurity. from A'hieh heavy loss has arisen, estimated ab over .€160,000, and that certain transactions have come under the notice of the committee calling 1 for the sriavest censuie, if not for more specific action. Why, then, should nob the names of these directors, who, ib appears, have compounded with the Bank, be stated ? ITor the sake of those dhectors now in office who have nob compounded with the Bank (and some honoured names are amongst them) the real culprits ought to be named. That it was high time that the dual arrangement by which Mr ]}\ Lark worthy was managing director both of the Bank of New Zealand and of the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency came to an end is self evident. Bub several of tho directorsare &bill on bhe Board of both Companies. Has, then, the Bank alone suffei-ed from the depression in New Zealand, and, if so,how is ib bhab the Loan and Mercantile has gob off scob free ? ' A Question for Me Thomas Russelj... " With reference bo my remarks on the Bank of New Zealand directors, a corret>~ pondenb calls my attention to the fact that Mr Thomas .Russell, a member of the London Board, paid a visit bo the colony at bhe end of last year, and should therefore have been fully conversant with all the circumstances. I find that at a meeting of shareholders in the New Zealand Land Mortgage Company, Limibed, held on January 13 (of which Mr Russell isalso a director, he staled n the chair that * iroin an investigation, minute and critical, of bhe whole of the investments of that Company, made duringa recentvisittothe colony, he cam© to bhe conclusion that they were in a mosb satisfactory state. ' It seems a pity that Mr Russell did nob, during his three months' residence at Auckland, also make •an invesbigabion minute and critical ' of the investments of the Bank of New Zealand, when various matters might have come to his knowledge which were not satisfactory. But perhaps Mr Thomas Russell heard enough on that .occasion bo answer the question which I put last week, as to which of the London or New .Zealand directors had obtained advances from, or compounded with, the Bank, and which directors caused the heavy loss,! all eady mentioned, to the, Bank?"