WITH WHICH 18 INCORPORATED THE SOUTHERN MERCURY. (THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 1897. THE WEEK.

Otago Witness, Issue 2242, 18 February 1897, Page 29

WITH WHICH 18 INCORPORATED THE SOUTHERN MERCURY. (THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 1897. THE WEEK.

" Kunquiun aliud D«tur», ahud itplentla rilxlt." — Juti.nac. The full text of Mr Henry Mackenzie's reply to the interim report of the Thelleply liquidators of the Colonial to Bank it a more satisfactory, the Liquidators, or at all events a more plausible document than might have been expected, judgirjg from the extracts telegraphed from Wellington in the firat instance. The latter unwittingly did Mr Mackeczie an injustice inasmuch as it made hire appear to have nothing at all to urge in defence of himself or his bank except that it had been overtaken by misfortune. The document set out at length is not really an answer to the grave statements of the liquidators, but it is superficially plausible. As a defence it is lamentably weak, but it leaves a better aspect on one or two matters than they carried before. It seems to us that Mr Mackenzie has wholly mistaken the scope aud character of the liquidators' report. He says t-hab " the general effect which they (the liquidators) desire to produce appears to be tbat the acts of the directors and management, as detailed by them, caused the losses which were incurred in connection with the accounts of Mr Ward, the Ward Farmers' Association, Mr John Ryley, and R. Anderson and Co." Surely Mr Mackenzie is hera very greatly mistaken. The general effect of the liquidators' report was to imbue the mind with the idea that the directors and management of the bank had conspired to deceive the shareholders and the public as to the true position of the institution, that the deception had been very deliberate, had been carried on over a series of years, and that the bank had conspired also to deceive the shareholders of the Ward Farmers' Association. Unhappily there is nothing in Mr Mackenzie's lengthy reply to remove that impression. And one evil impression the public had formed Mr Mackenzie does a good deal to deepen. That the Colonial Bank in the laat year of its existence was grossly deceiving the public with a view of foisting upon the colony a hopelessly rotten institution as a sound and flourishing one few people could ever have had any doubt. Mr Mackenzie makes the fact clear enough. " The idea of the Colonial Bank," he says, " was that they should get £300,000 cash, and have a suspense account of £100,000 opened by the Bank of New Zealand, the latter account to remain open for a certain time, and to be contingent upon the realisation of sundry accounts." In other words, the Colonial Bank was then scheming to get from the Bank of New Zealand (for which the colony was responsible) a sum equal to 30s per share, instead of the 13s 4d which the Bank of New Zealand, after a careful analysis of the accounts, found the property to be actually worth. The Colonial Bank hoped to get practically from the colony more than doable the amount they were in

honesty entitled to. That Jhe final balance sheet and the chairman's report were carefnlly constructed to help them to the plunder there cannot be any doubt whatever. Mr Mackenzie says that this was not so, but the reasons he adduces in support of the repudiation are so obviously weak as to be unworthy of consideration. The main one is that the Bank of New Zealand had previously been furnished with information in detail of the bank accounts. When if" is remembered that the Bank of New Zealand directors were new to the position, and that the only expert was Mr Watson, who was himself largely responsible for the condition of the Colonial Bank, it ie not difficult to believe that to successfully delude the directors was no more a forlorn hope than to deceive the public and the bank's own shareholders.

A Thin Cnse.

We have said that Mr Mackenzie improves the aspect of one or two items in the indictment against the management — morally and commercially — of the Colonial Bank. Cbief of these, the only one worth mentioning indeed, is that of the transaction with Cooper, Bons, and Nephew. It was an ugly-looking transaction as detailed by tha liquidators. A bill for £25,000 was drawn by the Hon. Mr Ward upon the firm in qaeation, discounted by the hank, the proceeds placed to the credit of Mr Ward, the bill sent forward to London, and, after lying there for some considerable time, sent back to the colony and debited to Mr Ward. It looked uncommonly like a bogus transaction with intent to decsive. It is fair to accept Mr Mackenzie's explanation showing it to be an ordinary transaction. Mr Ward had placed shares of the value named under offer to Cooper and Sons, and drawn a bill upon the firm, but had afterwards stopped the progress of the bill and had placed the share* — which were of the value represented — elsewhere. There may possibly be something more to explain on the part of Mr Ward, bat on the face of it the present explanation seems reasonable. No other item in the liquidators' indictment, of any importance, admits of palliation in the same way. Tbe shares above alluded to were afterwards sold to Nelson Bros., and it was the proceeds that, afterwards paid into tha bank, enabled Mrs Barron's guarantee of £5000 to be releaied. Tne release still remains aperfeotly uaintelligibleact. Tbe proceeds of the shares clearly belonged to the bank in any case, and Mr Ward had no more right to übb it than Mr Ryley would have to take money out of his own till without the bank's knowledge. The matter, however, is one for the shareholders of the Colonial Bank rather than for the public — unless it can be shown tbat the bank bad some special object affecting the public in thns so persistently playing into the hands of Mr Ward. On the whole question of Mr Ward's and the Ward Farmer*' Astociation'a affairs Mr Mackenzie makas a hopelessly and lamantably weak case. Mr Ward, indeed, is rather abandoned by Mr Mackenzie. When in 1893 Mr Ward paid a private cheque into the credit of the Farmers' Association on the eve of the issue of its balance sheet, and drew it out immediately afterwards when the object was accomplished, all that Mr Mackenzie has to say is that he knew nothing of the transaction till after it was over. Whan the following year a similar transaction took place with (as is alleged) the bank's sanction, Mr Mackenzie points triumphantly to the fact that no such letter of sanction is to be found, it " having passed out of Mr Ward's hands." To explain the oats transaction Mr Mackenzie falls back upon the evidence he gave before the Parliamentary Committee, and that evidence explains nothing at all. The gravsst matter of all, for it now wears an exceedingly ugly look, is that of the promissory note for £55,150 given by Mr Ward t6 the bank by way of consideration for the payment by the bank of the amount of Mr Ward* indebtedness to the Ward Association. To deceive the shareholders and the public as to tbe true position of the association Mr Ward silently becomes its debtor to the amount of £55,150. The bank Dixys off the debt at the very time that Mr Ward has a bill in hand under which the directors hope to sell the institution practically to the public at the rate of 30a if not 40a per share — the paid-op valne. The bank takes a promissory note from Mr Ward for the amount. Tbe liquidators show, what everyone knew before, that the promissory note was co much worthless paper, and that the bank clearly knew it, as is evidenced by tlie manner in which thoy treated it. Mr Mackenzie endeavours to show that the bank had securities for it, and — in desperation, one would think — he enumerates among the securities £15,000 of paid-op shares and £8000 oE contributing shares in the Ward Farmers Association ! There seems to be a streak of real ingenuousness in Mr Mackenzie. The bankpromotes in the first, instance the formation of the Ward Association to carry on its back an overdraft, of Mr Ward's of some £81.000. Then it cockers up the Association's balance sheet by bogus transactions to make it look solvent. Then it pays a huge sum of money for the same purpose. Finally it, or at all events the manager, crowns the process by pretending that Mr Ward's shares in the association represent £23,000 of security 1 On the whole, Mr Mackenzie would have done better to leave the business alone, — above all his grotesquely expressed desire to be examined by the Supreme Court.

An Unnecessary League.

It would no doubt be very easy to make merry at the expense of the Women's Franchise League, for the famous meeting of November last has not yet faded from the minds of men — or women either. Bat we forbear. The report of the president, read the other day, waß far from being an aggressive document ; it was indeed a subdued and distinctly colourless one. 'We should, however, seriously recommend the league to quietly disband, and for the most conclusive of reasons — namely, that there is no possible object in its continued existence. Mrs Hatton declares that for two years past she has been anxious to " take a long rest from public labour." We should be indeed grieved if she were compelled to take such rest for the reason assigned in the report— that of ill health— and with a view

' of obviating the necessity at a later period we would suggest the breaking up of the league now. The plain truth is that there has been too much of Mrs Hatton in the league from beginning to end, and a good deal too much of Mr Hatton also. If Mrs Hatton wants a , rest from the public, and the public wants b rest from Mrs Hatton, the time seems entirely opportune for taking the rest. We believe Mrs Hatcon to be thoroughly in earnest in her desire to further the "cause of womanhood,*' of which she has so much to say, though we could wish that • sacred cause were more completely divested of the private ambitions of Mr and Mrs ( Hatton. We recommend the league to dis- | band, because we believe the canse of | womanhood will progress as well, and in- , deed rather better, without it. The league is in no sense a representative body, and women generally do not recognise it as such. Women have now the franchise — a reform not in any way brought about by the league — and they have become broken in to the exercise of it. Generally they are quite sharp enough to see that the representative they require is not the man who bawls for " womens's rights," but the man ' who will make the most capable and honest representative. The country which is well governed for the men will ! after all be well governed for tho women. Long before women obtained the franchise in New Zealand, Parliament did much •to . ameliorate their condition, as a host lof statutes bear sufficient evidence. Nobody i desired to deprive women of their " rights " | before, and it is very certain no one will wish to deprive them of the same now that they have equalvotiog powers with men. There are somMßuseous questions to which Mrs Hatton alludes— with sufficient delicacy, id must be admitted — but we deny that they are in the least degree pressing, and even if they are Parliament can safely be left to deal with them without incitement from leagues. The sentence or two at the close of I Mrs Hatton's report, in which she shows that the Franchise Laague has been active in | assisting to alleviate distress, is the redeem- ; ing feature of the report.

Mb Geobge Hutchison, member for PAtea, was in a sarcastic humour when, at a press interview in Wellington, he gave his opinion on the subject of the Premier's posaible visit to England. We see no need for aarcaun in the matter. We are quits cure it is the wish of the colony that Mr Seddon should accept Mr Chamberlain's invitation, provided he can do so without serious loss or inconvenience in the "conduct of the business of the colony. It iv ill-natured and wholly unwarranted to asauma that the Premier is hankering after a title' and that he is most anxious to accept the invitation for the purpose of securing one. We suspect, and indeed it is an open secret, that he might have had one before now, but preferred to pass it on to hia late colleague, Sir Patrick Buckley. There is reason to believe Mr Seddon is by no means averse to titlas, but he has no doubt listened to the silly, canting condemnation, born partly of snobbery and greatly of envy, of Sir Robert Stout's acceptation of one ; and with more astuteness and lesa moral courage he would lika to accept the title when his political day is over. That, however, is nothing to the present purpose. It is desirable, we repeat, that Mr Seddon should attend the forthcoming celebrations. But in d >ing so he mus~ not evade the necessary work of the colony. The idea abroad is that he would like a short meeting of Parliament to pass supplies for a whole year and have no regular meeting of Parliament afterwards. That woVld be au entirely unprecedented and quite indefensible course. The notion, often expressed, that it would be a good thing if Parliament did not meet at all, or met without pausing any bills, is mere idle banality. There is always something of importance for Parliament to do ; while to give a Government plenty of money to spend with no sufficient criticism of, or check upou, the mode oi expenditure would be a highly dangerous innovation. The idea of the Hon. John M'Kenzie conducting the business is preposterous. But if supplies for a few months were passed towards the cod of March there is no reaion why Parliament should not reassemble in August, and some other member of the Government conduct the preliminary business for a fortnight or so until Mr Seddon bad time to be out) again.

Whkn distinguished visitors drop in upon us it. is generally regarded as the correct thing to at once proceed to worm opinions out of them. We are morbidly curious as to what they think about Australasian and Imperial federation, about defence and freetrade and frozen mutton ; about beef, butter, vine culture, and lots of other things. These matters are all extremely Important to us, and we do well to get the beat opinions we can regarding them. There are, however, other matters of minor importance upon which an occasional frank expression of outside opinion might do a world of good. There are, for instance, the highways and byways of Dunedin, which we ourflelves more or less contentedly traverse day by day. We should like to take Lord Brassey for a two hours' stroll among these streets and afterwards have the privilege of writing down his exact thoughts about the sights and smells experienced during the walk. We should like to know what he and such as he, fresh from the outer world, think about the foetid, open drains, the dirt and filth of almost every possible kind that lie unheeded upon nearly all our thoroughfares. Noses get accustomed to smelling anything in time, or how is it that we unconcernedly pass by the desiccating carcases of dogs, cats, rats, and fowls which commonly repose on the macadam or in the gutter, till passing wheels roll them out as thin as brown paper 1 Our visitors, fresh from purifying sea breezes, cannot be as indifferent as we ourselves are, so it may be inferred that however little is said by them a good deal is thought. Wisely, they mostly hold their tongues.

In the way of street- cleansing reform a great deal could be done without much expenditure. Labour is very cheap in Dunedin, as witness the lamplighters' agitation, triumphantly culminating for them in 30s a week. In tome parts of Europe old women are employed as street-sweepers, but we do not for a moment suggest that oox enfranchised old

' women should attempt to compc ■• lor anch i billets in Dunedin. On the other hand, we can see no particular reason why a selection of candidates for residence in the Benevolent Institution should not be let to do iuch work. Numbers of those we allude to are tolerably hale, and open-air work like that suggested would set many of them up in health. We suppose it would be regarded as treason to hint that prison labour might be tried. This suggestion is made by a correspondent, who says that a team from the Stuart street gaol could be turned out daily at 4 a.m. and have the streets in beautiful order by 6 — that is, we presume, he means after a few weoks had been devoted to removing the primal dirt from the whole town. However, it is doubtful whether prison labour is cheap labour even at half a crown 8 day — the Botanic gardens certainly have a better appearance since only free labour hat been employed in connection with them. Independent of this question, however, were the matter taken in hand in a propar spirit in the course of a few months Dunedin could be made quite sweet, for it is not so much the amount of rubbish as the fact that what falls mostly lies that so often renders our streets disgusting at present. Nature has j done much to mak«3 Dunedin one of the.most beautiful of cities ; perhaps by the end of the century we ourselves may do a good deal to make it one of the most sanitary.