ATTACKS ON THE PREMIER.

Colonist, Volume LIII, Issue 12975, 14 December 1910, Page 4 (Supplement)

ATTACKS ON THE PREMIER.

A SCURRILOUS PAMPHLET,

A CONVINCING REPLY IN PARLIAMENT.

FACTS ALL THE WORLD SHOULD

THE GRAIN WARRANTS.

BANK MANAGER'S IMPORTANT ADMISSION.

For some time past a scurrilous pamphlet has been industriously circulated throughout the Dominion attacking Sir J. G. Ward. The Premier referred, to the matter m the Hoiise on Wednesday, and the following exacts from his speech are taken rrom the "Now Zealand Times"' report :— At .the time alluded to it is perfectly well known that 1 was .at the Sf one of the Iwfflrt busUMMW id the country. It was the easiest thing in the world at that juncture when the bank with which it was trading ceased to exist for anyone to put that business down, and it was put down, and it was put down, at very .sum t notice. It was the easiest thing in the world, I say, under the circumstances for people at that time to rum me personally, and I was undoubtedly ruined for the time being. What was the outcome of the business referred to? I take this opportunity of saying it because I never had the opportunity at the time of being heard in my defence as I ought to have been heard— a privilege afforded to a Chuiamau, but it was not extended to me. That business which was at the time said by my opponents to have been an unsatisfactory business and was alleged to have been carried on in a reckless way under liquidation, with the wholesale daughter as is urually the case of the etocks and* stock-in-trade, realised £83,345— a larger amount by far than any other business — in proportion to the businesses, or in any way you like to take it — having connections ti-iili that bank realised. Of the whole of tho fanners who were doing business with that association not one of them was made a bankrupt as the result of the liquidation. The statement made that reckless trading was going on was made upon the assumption that an advance of £2000 to a contractor for building a bridge for which no security was held was a bad advance and was not likely to be repaid. It was believed to be so by the liquidator. Ho took legal proceedings to force a man who owed £2000 to pay it, beCieving that he was going to nave a very difficult job. Everybody connected with that business knew that the man could pay the £2000 instantor when called upon. Before 'the legal process was delivered upon the man he sent a cheque for tne £2000, and it was immediately paid. Not a farmer was ruined. Not a farmer out of several thousand who bad been doing business with the association filed his schedule as a r<?sult of those proceedings. Not one of the foTmers who had been doing business with it lost a shilling on his current account. And any man who knows anything about business will realise, without mo saying it, that was unprecendented so far as any large business is concerned either in this country or outside of it under similar circumstances — when a largo business is forced almost instanter into liquidation. One of the assets that ivas said to be "valueless" I, a short time afterwards, with the assistance of two or throe of my persona/l friends, bought, and within three months of that time I netted £9200 profit on it. I used the proceeds of the £9200 to pay some of the English creditors-;— a material portion — and I also paid some of the New Zealand creditors a material portion of the amount owing to them. Let me also say, Mr. Speaker, that within cix months of the time referred to another business that I had established and which was decried and pooh-poohed as being of little value was sold by me for £45,000 cash. I refer to certain freezing works which nave been heard of, and which have been entirely managed by my firm. Those works have since paid ilie owners handsomely. 1 have already told the House that the realisation of the Ward Association

amounted to £83,545. Let me, also . say that what was known as my'"estate" was purchased by mo, with the *• assistance of friends. It waß said bj many of my critics to bo almost value-, less. The answer to that is that within on© year it was netting over £4000 profit annually, and to-day it is netting over £6000 per annum. That is the answer to those slanderers and to those people who have all along en-* deavoured to make out, bo far as my personal assets were concerned, that at the time they were of very small value indeed. Side by side with the liquidation process that went on at that time, the ordinary business carried on by that association was taken in hand and was carried on in my own. name. It would not be fair for me to announce to the country the profits that that business has since made, except to say this : that it has made more net profits than would have, paid the whole of the ctcbitg and liabilities of the Ward Association at that time. I take this opportunity of saying that, l>ocause the facts are available and they can . be vouched for. My first idea and action in connection with that . business was to see that the English f and Australian creditors were paid in ■ full, and this I did in a comparatively B short time ; another, was to see that tho whole of the creditors of the "Ward Association were paid 20s in the. £1, and I am proud and thankful to say. that I did it quickly too. Although friends of myself volunteered in different portions of this country to assist •me and to place at my disposal a very large number of thousands of pounds in cash, I. made no use in any way of their preferred assistance— - 1 made no use in any way of any money of private people in this country who were kind enough at the time to place large sums at ray disposal. Let me take this opportunity of saying in regard to a suggestion that has been made more than once that I was connected with what some people caTl a swindle, in connection with oats held by the- Ward Association, that I was never directly or indirectly connected with a swindle in connection with this matter, nor have I been connected with anything in the 6hape of a mercantile swindle in this country or out of it at any_ time. I tako the opportunity of saying that in the process of the liquidation of the Ward Association there was no interim report Bent in by the liquidator. Tho cost of the liquidation and law costs ran into a sum of about £18,000, though one of the leading firms in this country offered to liquidate the whole business fo r £1000. I finally purchased tho < remaining debts of tho Ward jWociaticn for the sole purpose of getting the books of the liquidator into my Jianclfl, and 1 have had thorn for a considerable period. Here let me also say that within, six months after the liquidation of the Ward Association, commenced there came into the stores of that company eonsiderubly more sacks of gram than all the alleged shortage, regarding which from time to time I have been, in an absolutely malicious, lying manner, accused of having done something dishonourable. In connection with this matter I have held for a considerable period a letter from the then manager of the bank acknowledging in writing that ho ought to have stated that the warrants lie then held were for both "in store" and "to arrive," which is a very common thing in conti ration with large businesses. Tho ijicu to&n&ger of ih& Ward Associ- _. 'tttfiffli, though accused grossly unfairly from, time to time, is one of the most honourable) men in this country, arid r< man who, in my opinion, would not do a dishonourable thing for anybody. Everybody connected with the- business knows that this is so. It is thoso whom I have never bad any business with who have busied themselves from time to timo, and in a grossly unfair way. -I have during the time at my disposal to-day attempted to put on record very briefly what occurred dur-

ing tho realisation of those assets. During their realisation the new business every year carried on by my firm had a large carning-power attached to it of a most profitable character, and I take this opportunity of saying that my firm has never at any time done business with the Government of this country, or with any Government department. lam thankful to say it has done well, is doing well, and was doing so from the start, side by side ivith the business that was. .in my opinion, improperly compelled to go through the process of liquidation to which I have just referred. There have been people industriously circulating a statement that I was responsible for what they are good enough to term the smash of the Colonial Bank. First, the Colonial Bank was never smashed, it never stopped payment ; its business was sold to the Bank of New Zealand. Secondly, I never was a party to the sale of the Colonial Bank to the Bank of .New Zealand, arid, thirdly, I was not a shareholder in the Colonial Bank. J never received a concession in business from that bank, although I was doing a large amount of business with it. Not only was I not a party to the sale of the bank, but it is weO known to everyone .in the inner circle that on behalf of the Government I did all in my power to have the National Bank of New Zealand purchased or amalgamated and tho present general manager of that bank was offered the position of president of the Bank of New Zealand, the directors in London, however, refusing to agree. Those who accused me of being responsible for what was called the "smash" of the Colonial Bank are worse than slanderers of the first water. I possess a list of the writings off and losses of the Colonial Bank which came into my possession, fairly and legitimately. I want to know where these men are who are slanderers and imputers of bad motives, as regards the Josses made by tliat bank with which I had neither directly, nor indirectly, anything to do. I want to know where their inieribsb Vies in connection vnhh-Okese losses to which I have referred 1 I know every one of them. I want to know where the same people are. in connection with those who are responsible for losses to the amount of two millions sterling in the Bank of New Zealand. I want to know where those slanderers are ?

Mr. Laurenson : In the ranks of the Opposition. .Mr. Massey:' I rise to a point of order. • • .

Mr. Speaker : I must ask the lion, member for Lyttolton to withdraw that remark. . The interjection is improper and the words used are Improper. > Mr. Laurenson: Very well, sir. Sir J. G. Ward continued —

Before I proceed further I want to ask the hon. member for Bruce' a question. If by any chance some person without means — some printer, without means — were to write a letter about the hon. gentleman's family — say hip mother, who is dead, and gone, or his wife who is alive, or his father, who is dead and gone — and suppose that by the merest chance in the world a copy oame into my possession, and I car-' ried it about with me, and produced it in trains, and handed it to other people to read, what opinion would the hon. member for Bruce have of me? He would probabCy look upon me as being a blackguard or a skunk, and I would feel that that is exactly what I ought to be called. I want to ask the hon. member if ho has not done that in connection with the Black pamphlet P And now, I want to ask the hon. member for Tauranga what he would think of. me under similar conditions ? What would he think of me if his mother, who was dead a^nd gone, or his wife, who is alive, were written about by some unknown person, and the pamphlet came into my hands, and I handed copies of it to anyone ? What would he think of me in that case? Ho would say that the term "blackguard," or "skunk," or "cur," or any other term of approbrium, would be applicable to me, and I would say so too. In turn I want to ask the leader of the Opposition this question: If the organiser on" our side carried a pamphlet, f«>m Which this pamphlet was compiled, through this country prior to an election, what would he think of the Government organiser P What would he think of mo if I allowed, it to be done? There are no terms in the English language that he would not apply to mo, and rightly so. And he knowb that what I say is true— that his organiser, Mr Martin, was carrying that pamphlet about. The hon. gentleman cannot deny it. I have felt called upon to what I have because I recognise this: That I was— by forces used unfairly against me— put down fourteen years ago ift perfectly true. I had done a very great deal to help to keep other people out of financial troubles and difficulties prior to that nnd had succeeded. * I was deserving of at least ordinary consideration, and I got treatment that wou!d be condemned as un-British if applied to a Chinaman. I was compelled to give up everything I possesed in this world. I had to resign my seat in the ministry and the Bouse. I-iold tlie House, at the time that they had not heard the last of me. I was out of the Houso less than three weeks, and I am proud to say that in my own electorate I have «tood five times since I resigned, and in spite of the strongest opposition that my opponents could put against me, the people who knew me from boyhood elected me by overwhelming majorities. (Applause.) I stood for other positions that the ratepayers could return me for, and in everjr instancejl was elected. Every election I have gone through in my 'ife, local or otherwise^ I have been fortunate enough to win. It is perfectly true, Mr Speaker, that I began life as a boy earning 10s a week, and lam not ashamed of it. (Hear, hear.) A member: More honour to you! Sir Joseph Ward: No one could ever say a word against th« uprightness or honesty of my parents. It is equally true that as the result of hard work — because I can say without egotism that I have been a hard worker all any life— l have, succeeded in' getting to the highest position that my fellow countrymen and women could bestow in a country such as .this. lam proud of it* Is it to be said that the method of attack which has been going on for the last fifteen years^ not against the policy of the Administration, but against the man who was at the head of the Administration for the time being, in the hope of bringing about the destruction of the party of which he is the head, is fair political fighting, and is to be continued. I want to ask, is it to be the system in this country— becauso I te-'l the House that it occurred to Mr Ballance in his day, it occurred to MrSeddbn in his da3\ and it has occurred to me in my day— is it to be the system" in this 'country that,. in order to dislocate the party that is in the ascendant.this method of personally attacking individuals in connection with their private affairs or business concerns is to go on ? I have taken the trouble recently to look at the history of men in other countries — men, it is true, in a very much higher position than that held by the man who for the time being happens to bethe Prime Minister of this country ; and thoxigh I have read of strong fights, I have never known in a British Parliament, amongst British people, of an attempt being made to get at a man who iappehs' by hard work and the goodwill of the country and the men who support him in the Par iament of" rthe country to be the head- of the Gpveriuhentr— l have never Vnoira i)i©- methods i-hat have Veen I followed in New Zealand to exist In i other countries, except on© or two of (the Continental countries, which we jdo not take as our guide.