THE BANK OF NEW ZEALAND

Te Aroha News, Volume VII, Issue 444, 8 February 1890, Page 5

THE BANK OF NEW ZEALAND

INTERVIEW WITH MR THOMAS RUSSELL. (FROM ouk special CORRESPONDENT.) London, December 27. Though Mr Thomas Russell, C.M.G., has not thought it advisable to pick up the gauntlet thrown down to him by the “ Financial Times” and to explain forthwith the meaning of Mr Buckley’s allegations against him at the Bank of Now Zealand meeting of October 25th, it must by no means be assumed that he does not mean to defend himself when the right time comes. Thinking that in the present crisis of the Bank’s strange eventful history Mr Russell's views would have considerable interest for your readers, I ventured to ask him for an interview, and in duo course received a note bidding me to his residence in Eaton Square.

Mr Russell had been suffering from a sharp attack of influenza and was only partially convalescent. He seemed, however, in fair spirits, and it was with his customary manner, alert, yet wary, he turned a keen glance on me and asked, “ Well, and what can I tell you ?” “A good many things if you will, Mr Russell, but in the first place do you intend taking any steps concerning the articles in the Financial ‘.Times ’ and other papers which have made free with your name ? * “No,” he said ; “the time to answer Mr Buckley’s charges has nob come yet. I understand he has guaranteed the London Board through a firm of solicitors to give proofs for all the statements he made at the Bank meeting on October 25th. When these are supplied one will have something tangible to go upon and I shall then ” (significantly) “have a good deal to say. Of course, if Buckley’s charges had been"reiterated by the ‘Times’ (‘ The Times,’ I mean) or even by the ‘ Financial News,’ my hand would have been forced; but the ‘Financial Times’ is read by few and carries no weight in the city. If even one of my friends had come to me and advised ’Speak out’ I might have done so, but they all say ‘ Le’t Buckley give chapter and verse first."’ 1 may add, too, that my relations with the Bank are nob purely personal, They involve other people whose names have not as yet been mentioned, and I have no right to publish their aflairs to the world in order to contradict wild unsupported charges.” “ lhen there is nothing you would cave to say now’ ?” I ventured tentatively. “I -will say this much. Mr Buckley talked of my having a secret agice.mCnt with the Bank. I know of no secret agreement. My agreement u’as executed by the Bank’s solicitors, bears the Bank stamp, and was duly ratified by the then Board of Directors. You can scarcely call that a secret agree-' mono. As to the Bank losing money by me, they’ll never lose a penny. At first when Buckley (at that time President) called on me imperatively to settle up my affairs, I referred him to my agreement with the Bank, and flatly refused to depart from it. Tho London Board, however, persuaded me to waive my. rights, and I either paid up or,gave security for every farthing I owed the Bank. At the present moment the balance outstanding is covered over and over again by .the securities held.” “Aud the general statements, Mr Russell, which Mr Buckley has. made about the Bank’s affairs. Do you believe them ? You should know a good bit about the institution.” “Oh! my connection with the Bank practically ended fifteen years ago. It was a prosperous enough concern then, heaven knows. Of course, I have been a London director since, but that is not the same thing.” “When do you suppose Mr Buckley made his alarming discoveries concerning the in globo account ?” “ Ah ! that is a question many of us would like to have answered. In May, ISBB, in August, 1888, and up to April, 1889, hei professed himself perfectly satisfied with the way matters were progressing ; and who should know if not he ? s I am told he sab in the Bank parlour day after day, and had access to all documents. It was not, indeed, till he found he couldn’t twist the Board round his fingers that his confidence in the Bank’s future commenced to flag.” ’• • ■ ■■ i ; “Have you confidence in the present New Zealand Board ?” r - ■ i . < r I know’ very few of them ;■•Williamson, Stone and the old lot are; (with a sigh) all gone. I have, however, great contidence in J no. Murray, and so I know have the London Board. ! Murray is the rock on which they lean serene and secure.” , “Mr Murdoch, 1 fear, did the Bank a good deal of harm i?” h- - 1 ! . “Mr Murdobh has;been most unjustly, •blamed.- Ho was,only part of a bad system. When the crasli came instead- of; trying to !fathom its 1 real' causes, Buckley ( turned round'and- called'everybody' villains. Dr. - 'Campbell hit-the real nailon the head when; lie said ‘ the bottom had dropped out of the; land.’ Land dropped first in England.' Then as the acceleration of steam brought! the great markets of the world nearer to; each other, serious changes became noticeable in New Zealand,” -v • ; >; (if .i.r----“I always thought;the easy,;overdraft) system had much to answer for ?” “ You are quite right. I fought against it hard when I was a local director. But

what was the u-°e ? If the Bank of New Zealand wouldn’t' give ‘ reasonable facilities,’ other banks would, and the customer withdrew his account. I don’t think we were worso than our neighbours;'V 1; ■ “Other banks I suppoee lost heavily?’--iOf course they didi 1 but they.were not all blessed with a Buckley ! It didn’t seem essential to'them to wash their dirty linen as publicly as possible.” “ Would you advise buying Bank ol New Zealand shares now ?” “ I shall certainly not buy myself till I know what the future government of the Bank is going to be. The removal of the head office from Auckland strikes me as a retrogi ade step. 'The strong point of the Bank used to be that a man could go in there and borrow money on the spot -without ■ having his request referred to a London Board or being compelled to guarantee 1 the return of the money-in six -months if ’ called ’ on. No doubt the New Zealand directors had found themselves obliged : to’ urge the removal ot -the head office as a counter to Buckley. Personally, however, I cofisider it a serious mistake.” After some further conversation, I thanked Mr Russell and withdrew.