The Hastings Standard Published Daily. WEDNESDAY, FEB. 3, 1897. WHY THIS SILENCE?

Hastings Standard, Issue 237, 3 February 1897, Page 2

The Hastings Standard Published Daily.

WEDNESDAY, FEB. 3, 1897. WHY THIS SILENCE?

I-"<■ ir the cause tint lark-- assistance, lY,r the that nred resistance, l-'or the future in tin: distance. And the good that v>c can do.

Tiik report of the Liquidators of the Colonial J>ank is now many days old. It is a report hea\ ily laden with grave charge.-; n;'.ain: t several per-on.-, und vet tiler*.- is no mo\ement to administer justice. It is due in those who are covered l.y the report and is due al.-o to tin hai'ehuMe r ; of the defunct hank thai an opportunity for e\plana lion if Midi he po-Mble should he atforded the directors and olhceM of tlie Colonial Hank. Above all it is due to the people of this colony who art; now to till inteuU and purposes sbareholdi i"i in the Hank of New Zea land tint the clinclo.-mrt:-. should hi probed to the bottom. Tin re are many things that require explanation, and if thiM colony ha* any appreciation of morality, and we unhesita tiagly say that it tons, then the people people will iiiiat that a foil and fair

inquiry is held, not an inquiry of the nature of that bastard exhibition of last session which as the Banking Committee of Inquiry fooled the people.

There is a growing suspicion in the minds of the public that the country has been sacrificed for the benefit of individuals. It is now darkly hinted that on that evening in -June, 1894, when the Bank of New Zealand was being succoured, the aid given to this institution was only part of a scheme, the real object of which was to save the Colonial Bank and so hush up those transactions which have only been partly revealed since. There are a number of pertinent question? which must be answered, and answered in the plainest language before the public will feel satisfied. The people will require to know <vhy the Bank of New Zealand was instructed, induced, or compelled to invest in New Zealand Consols to the extent of £150.000, and why this sum so obtained by the Treasury was placed with the Colonial Bank on deposit in London. When this transaction, peculiar in itself, to say the least of it, was carried through, the Colonial Treasurer of the day, the Hon. J. G. Ward, was practically insolvent, at any rate he and his pocket company were indebted to the Colonial Bank in a sum far beyond their abilities to repay. It may be fairly asked, was this transaction in the interests of the country, or was it to save a tottering institution carried through by a responsible Minister of the Crown who was at the time under the thumb of the favor receiving Bank. Then the people will require to know the connection between the £55,150 promissory note of Mr Ward and the Banking Legislation of 1895. Here is a man hopelessly bankrupt giving a promissory note for a huge sum which the receiver treats as cash, which is not recorded in auy book, but is stowed away with other documents in the Bank's safe. No one seems to get any benefit from this blundering and monstrous transaction but the maker of the promissory note, the Hon J. G. Ward, for the amount is written off his indebtedness to the Association. Now it is not unreasonable to ask, seeing the peculiar nature of the transaction, what was the valuable consideration underlying the whole matter. Who benefitted or was expected to benefit by the extraordinary business. Then it will be necessary to assure the >.i:_ ii.,„i wnvfl r.noonf voo. puunn ma.- o-- -

sons for the Bank of New Zealand taking up £20,000 of the Ward Association debentures. When this transaction was undertaken the Association was insolvent, the President of the Bank of New Zealand, who appears to have recommended the business, must have known or ought to have known of the parlous condition of the Association. Why were these debentures taken up ? And what made the President recommend their purchase'? A complete and satisfactory answer must be forthcoming, for as it now stands this transaction has a very ugly appearance. Another matter that will require clearing is the Ministerial connection with the side issues of the banking business. Mr Seddon and some other Ministers have asserted from many platforms that Mr Ward was untainted, that when the proper time arrived he would clear himself--that he was being persecuted by political opponents for political purposes. Wc ar« sure, after the recent revelations, no one will look upon Mr \\ ard as a maligned and badly used individual ; it will therefore be necessary to explain how Mr Seddon and other Ministers allowed themselves to protest Mr Ward's innocence. Were they cognisant of the true state of affairs and wilfully misled the public, or were they themselves misled '<* If they were deluded themselves, it shows how easily they can be deceived, but the public will want to know why Ministers did not make full inquiry before making misleading statements on the public platform. Then there is the statement of Mr Theo Cooper, the eminent lawyer, who appeared at the Bar of the House as Counsel for Mr Watson, and watched the proceedings of the Banking Committee on behalf of the hank of New Zealand. This gentleman -tated on the public platform in Auckland, that from the knowledge he had gained in his olhcial cuparity as advocate of the Bank of New Zealand, Mi Ward was entitled to the thanks of the public for the share be had taken in the Banking legislation and alto gether led us to believe that Mr Ward's official character was as white as the driven . now. Tile people will now want to know whether this .eua official utterance of Mr Theo. t ooj*r was true, or had any semblance of truth when uttered. I'itl Mr I ooj*;r make the statement of his own free will or was he paid or promhsetl ptivincut for doing ho ? Was th«> consideration, if any in eie»h or in kind, if in the latter was it the promwe of & judgeship that iwpeUwl him to

make the statement. These are but a few of the many questions involved in the "disclosures" which the public will require answering. There is a strange silence all round but it will never do ; if the responsible authorities will not take up the matter of their own free will and as they are in duty bound to do, then the public must by constitutional agitation force upon these reluctant individuals a just appreciation of their duties. Rascality in high life must meet with punishment with the same certainty as offences committed by humbler individuals. In a democracy no distinctions can be drawn, and we boast that we are up-tc-date in democracy.