THE BANKING ENQUIRY.

Waikato Argus, Volume I, Issue 45, 22 October 1896, Page 4

THE BANKING ENQUIRY.

The Press, commenting on the report of the Banking Committee, v, rites: " Barring Mr Hutch'fou, liowever, it was composed entirely of membcis of the (Government and their supporters, and throughout the so-cillcd " tiiMjniry " the Committee have scdu'ously followed the lead of the two Ministers in excluding evidence that would tend to throw light on the question as to whether .Ministers really had any personal interest in ths legislation or not. That Mr Ward had a very strong interest in its being carried is beyond question, and the flimsiuess of the pretext set up fur not going into his connection with the Colonial Bank—namely, the plea that there had been " no writing-off " —is really too ridiculous in face of the evidence given before Mr Justice Williams in the Supreme Court. Let us for a moment consider the position on October 23 , .h, IS!>~>, when Mr Ward moved th:: second reading of the Bill for giving eirect to the purchase of the Colonial Dank by the Hank of New /(•aland. At that time the Directors and (ieneral .Manager of the CVoni.il Bank must have known that the bal-ance-sheet, dated the previous .'<lst August, wa.s altogether misleading, and that the Bank's position if left unsupported was critical jn the extreme.

In the agreement which they signed two months after that balance-sheet was issued they consented to regard no less than C10'2,274 as accounts that, could not be considered .is proper to be ttken over. The Chairman of Directors, the Hoi. G. McLean, has frankly admitted in evidence that if he had told the shareholders at their meeting in September that there intis". be writing down the Hank would not have been open three days. Mr Ward when lie moved the second reading of the T.ill, know that lie was hopelessly involved to the Colonial Hank. Six days before, at the request of the Hank, lie had given them his promissory note for i'55,150 in reduction of the liability of the Ward Association so as to make the account of the latter more presentable for being taken over by the Hank of New Zealand. That promissory note, according to Mr Jnst : ce Williams, " would lie of little or no value to the Bank," inasmuch as Mr Ward had practically no resources with which to meet it. Tt is idle to pretend that under these circumstances Mr Ward was not most deeply interested personally in the passige of the Bill which he, as Colonial Treasurer, brought before the House. It is said, in reply, that in reality the "Bill di I not prove to be of a:iy benefit to him. Tint, however, is simply due to th<j intervention cf the •Supreme Court. If Mr Justice Williams had sanctioned the arrangement made with the Co'onial Bank liquidators, Mr Ward WouM hive, been freed fiom his troubles. In the words of the leaned •Judge, " A veil would have been deliberately drawn so as to hide the past as far as possible ; Mr Ward's bankruptcy would have been purposely prevented, and th'ngs generally would have been made pleasant." The legislator! was quite sufficient, if only the Judge had seen his way to sanction the arrangement proposed, but his Honour did not consider it " desirable in the " interests of commercial morality " that he should do so. The Committee, of course, soy nothing about all this, and uie as silent as the grave about the notorious oats transaction. They wax righteously indignant about the conduct of the old Bank of New Zealand Directors, most ot whom arc now dead or beyond reach. But while they grub so energetically among the dead men's bones, they are delicacy itself as regards the living. Nothing could he milder or more considerate than their criticisms of the misleading balance - sheet issued by the Colonial Bank a little more than ;' year ago, unless it is the absolute reserve with which they treat Mr Ward."