THE LATE GENERAL MANAGER'S REPLY.

Press, Volume XLV, Issue 7176, 11 October 1888, Page 5

THE LATE GENERAL MANAGER'S REPLY.

The Auckland Herald of Tuesday publishes Mr D. L Murdoch's reply to the Shareholder's Committee's report on the aflairs of the Bank. The following are the material portions: — "In a time like this, after the unexampled depression of the past six years, I can quite appreciate the difficulty the Committee would experience in attaching values to the large mass of securities held by the Bank, and have heard ie urged that propertyfor which no offer could be obtained L worth nothing, and any advance against it should be written off as a bad debt. J. have not the least idea on what data the Committee have arrived at theii estimate of loss, but unless on some such principle as the above the result is quite irreconcilable with any knowledge possessed of some of the Bank securities. The result, however, is truly trenchant, and I can only congratulate whoever succeeds to the office cf general manager that such a clean sheet has been provided for mm. The in nendoea in the report are worse than the accusations, and do credit to the ingenuity of the framers. In the seventh paragraph there is one very uncalled-for remark as to the selection of a manager for Sydney and Adelaide. Such selection, it is said, was in each case, to say the least, unfortunate, the implication evidently being that the Directors had some sinister motive in making the selection—a wholly gratuitous and unwarrantable reflection. The paragraph goes on to say that after a gambling career, long known to most people, the manager was convicted of embezzling the Bank's funds. Here again by inference shareholders are asked to believe that there was culpable neglect in the Directors not knowing what was known to most people. This was dealt with at the half-yearly meeting on 18th April, 1886, when in 'reply to a question, " whether in the opinion of the authorities a man who is apparently notorious as a betting and racing man is eligible for the office of Manager of a Bank," it is stated that neither the Directors nor Executive had any knowledge of the Manager having such a character, and if the knowledge was possessed by shareholders, it was much to be deplored that they did not give a note of warning to the Directors. The same reply may well be given to this part of the Committee's report. " The further statement that in Adelaide office money appears to have been, squandered in a way which can only be characterised as reckless and disastrous, is a very wild one, with some justification as to the character of some of the advances, but without any allowance for appreciation of the almost universal bankruptcy which overtook the commercial community of Adelaide consequent on the effect of a four years' drought. If the Directors and Managers had the advantage possessed by the Committee of judging after the event it would be a very easy matter to avoid losses. I pass over the next three paragraphs, which more properly fall to be answered by some members of the Board.

"In the eleventh paragraph there is a very uncalled for allusion to the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Company. There may be different opinions as to the value of the connection on which the Committee appear to set no little weight, but I can say that as far as rates for business go the Company has had no advantage over other important commercial accounts. It ia, however, the next paragraph that I would desire to call special attention to. Inuendo again appears in the statement that I was intimately associated with a limited circle who' have had the real control of the Bank's policy for many years. It is impossible for mc to say what was in the minds of the Committee when this was written. I do not suppose it is meant to be implied that this limited circle was outside the Bank, as, if so, the implication would be as unworthy the Committee as insulting to mc. The limited circle was the Board of Directors. Surely it is not unnatural that more or less intimate association should exist between them and the General Manager. lam not, however, aware of ever having had a transaction with any of the Directors except being a fellow sufferer in various - local enterprises in which we were shareholders, much to our loss. The report would no doubt. have been more sympathetic if its compilers had risked some capital in the same direction. Of the importation of the remainder of this paragraph into the report, which lends to it an appearance of personal animus from which it should have been free, there is in it misrepresentation of my action and misstatement of facts which a little wider inquiry would have prevented ; but while I adhere to the statement I have made, I am not going to follow the example of the committee by introducing into this letter petty questions of division of responsibility and relative efficiency of officers. These were subjects for the private consideration of the Committee, but can have no interest for the general body of shareholders, and should have no place in the report. I will only further add that this is no time for vituperation and recrimination, which the report seems to court. We may disagree as.to the warrant for such very incisive action as has been taken, but I am sure that there can be but one hope, that it will prove to nave been for the oest interests of the Bank."