NEW ZEALAND AND ITS LEADING BANK.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1099, 24 March 1893, Page 41

NEW ZEALAND AND ITS LEADING BANK.

(Financial Times, February 2, 1893.) Ono of the notable oharacteristioa of our colonial friends is that they are extremely thln-skiuned. The Finanoial Times ia very well known In the colonies, and when we have occasion to comment editorially on colonial topios, the cable and Her Majesty's mails convey it to our cousins overseas If the comments are unfavourable—which we regret to eay has recently been necessary in many oases—then our contemporaries arc good enough to point out to their readors that we do not know what we aro talking about; that we are prejudiced ; that we refleot the opinion of disappointed operators; or, in faot, anything of a disparaging nature which suggests itself to the various writers regarding a journal whose comments, never, theless, are considered worthy of transmission at length by cable. But if, in the exercise of oar privilege of honest criticism on current events, we have the pleasure of saying anything complimentary, then the Financial Times has to be patted on the back, referred to as 'the first finanoial authority in London.' and gonorally treated as a raost estimable and thoroughly impartial crlt-c. With all respect to our colonial contemporaries, we oaro equally little for their abuse and their eulogy. In saying this we refer merely to the papers whioh eeek to pander to local sentiment only, and regulate their allotment of epithets by the favourable or unfavourable nature of the comments they profess to criticise/there are many honourable exceptions—journals whioh form their own opinions on the data available to them, and treat their opponents with courtesy, however Bevere the oritioism they may mete out. These remarks are by no means Irrelevant to the Bank of New Zealand meeting yesterday, which is our subject at the moment Oar readers will remember the position we had to take up with regard to the previous vegime. We have no wish or intention to re-open old soreß, but this reference to the bare faot will not be resented. Those readers will also remember that when New Zealand was passing through Its recent period of improvidence and preposterous financial methods, we commented severely on that improvidence and those methods. But when Mr Ballanoa—a colonial stattsman from whom wo differ in most respects -i inaugurated a sound financial

polioy, we were amongst the first to recognise and applaud the fact. ' Not the least noteworthy feature of the incident (tho publication of the financial statement for 1892) is,' says one of our New Zealand contemporaries, ' that our most virulent critic of 1891, The Financial Times, leads the demonstration cf 1892 with a wholesouled, z'ialous approbation which makes up for its previous virulence.' We select this naive remark from a large number before us, because it illustrates eo admirably the attitude of the partisan portion of the colonial pre3B towards unbiassed criticism. If we had changed our views we might have less reason to complain of the term ' virulence,' as applied to our previous expressions of opinion. But as Now Zealand has come round to our view, the remark is childish. Similarly with tho Bsnk of New Zealand. We have no doubt that some of our contem. porarles in tho Colony will rake up our previous ' virulent ' remarks on the maladministration of that concern and on the ouriocs transactions which took place ; and the Financial Times wili be describee! as now atoning by a \&ho!e-souled, zealous approbation for our past misdeeds. In the one oase, aa Ju the other, such comments are absolutely inappropriate. New Zealand has reformed, and, taking everything into consideration, we would rather hold its stook at the present moment thin that of any other Australasian Co'ony. The Bank of Now Zealand has reformed, and Is making steady progress towards regaining the place in tho front rank which it ones held. We have much more pleasure in putting those opinions on record than we should have in Btating that the smaller fry of tha Australasian press had become civil to Tho Financial Times.