11

1.—6

82. Have you seen Mr. Buckley's speech delivered at the half-yearly meeting of the proprietors of the bank in October, 1889?— I have not seen it. 83. Mr. Buckley says, " The total deficits come to something under £750,000. Anything in addition must come out of capital; they took a margin of £50,000, making a total of £800,000. Accounts turned out to be so unreliable and misleading, as well as certificates being worthless to authenticate and support the several estimates, that the committee would need to have taken a margin of at least £250,000, or just one-third more than the bank accounts themselves show." Was that the course as stated in the balance sheet itself by the officers of the bank ? He then further says, " He had given merely some of the larger items, but he was quite sure he was not far out of the estimate when he put New Zealand down at £30,000, and Australia and Fiji at £30,000 more. That would make £60,000. If they would add it all up they would find that it amounted to £354,000, so that he thought he made an under-estimate when he said, that at the very least there was to be accounted for, at the present moment, some £300,000 on those accounts, which, in the meantime, was so much capital lost." That simply agrees with what has been given as from the balance-sheet of the bank—a difference of £50,000. Now, from what has come under your own notice, after going carefully into the business of the bank, do you think the directors were justified in paying those dividends you have given to us in the years which have been mentioned—do you think it was honest in face of the matters disclosed to you since you have been a director ?—I do not think I have got sufficient information to warrant me in saying more than this : that, in view of the position we found the bank in, the paying of any of the dividends referred to is a very extraordinary thing to me. I can say nothing more. 84. Would you say these balance-sheets you have given to the Committee disclosed a true state of the position of the Bank of New Zealand, judging simply from what has come under your own notice since you have become a director ?—I can only say that their estimate of the position was very different from the estimate which, I think, I should have formed of it. 85. Do you think the writings-off which you have quoted were sufficient to have met fairly the bad and doubtful debts ?—We found when we took over the bank that the writings-off had not made sufficient provision 86. The Chairman.] For all the bad and doubtful debts ?—No. 87. Hon. Mr. Seddon.] W T hat you recommended to be written off was the difference—what you thought would have been a fair position to the Bank —and what you found it ?—That is the measure of difference. 88. £771,000 practically?— Yes. 89. Are the same officers in the bank now that were in the bank at the time these writingsoff took place, previous to your going into office ?—Some of them are still in the bank. 90. Are the same officers that would be responsible for recommending and giving to the previous directors and boards the position of the bank—-are the same officers there now as then —the principal officers ? —I think not. 91. Have you, as a director, come across any recommendations of officers to previous boards of directors recommending writings-off which have been ignored by directors, and in place of these writings-off dividends have been declared ?—I have not. 92. Is the estimate of the writings-off necessary to place the bank in a safe position £771,000 —is that in accordance with the recommendations of the officers of the bank?—lt is in accordance with the recommendations of the present officers. 93. Who is the principal officer?— The President of the bank, Mr. Watson. 94. Who are the chief inspectors ? —The inspectors who have most supervision of the bank outside are Mr. Litchfield, Mr. Buller, and Mr. Dignan; there are three. These are the three inspectors for the colony. The present inspector in Australia is Mr. Parfitt. 95. Now, previously, in the change of management by boards and managers, who would make the recommendations for writings-off and put them before the directors ?—I should think the general manager. 96. And who was the general manager in 1891, 1892, and 1893—that is, immediately before they came to Parliament?— Mr. Holmes was appointed general manager in March, 1891, and he remained in charge until June, 1894. 97. We had better take the time of the balances—say, the balance-sheet of March, 1894. Who was the general manager then?— Mr. W. T. Holmes. 98. Who was manager in March, 1895 ?—Mr. Andrews was acting general manager, but he was home in London at the time, and Mr. Watson had practically charge of the bank. 99. For the year 1888, I think, you gave us Mr. Murdoch ?—Mr. D. L. Murdoch. 100. In 1889 Mr. Murray ?—For a short time, on the sth June, Mr. John Murray became general manager. 101. I want to know who is responsible as general manager for the times—commence with 31st March, 1888?— Mr. Murdoch. 102. The Chairman.] In September, 1888, was Mr. Murdoch still general manager?-—No; Mr. John Murray was appointed on the sth June. 103. Hon. Mr. Seddon.] Then, at the next balance-sheet, 31st March, 1889, who was general manager? —Mr. John Murray. 104. And September, 1889?— He was assisted by Mr. G. E. Tolhurst in March and September, 1889. 105. In March, 1890, who was manager then?— Mr. Butt was acting as general manager at that time, and Mr. Hean was investigating the affairs of the bank at the same time. 106. Mr. Butt was acting general manager then?— Yes. 107. Who was general manager in March, 1891? —Mr. Holmes took office on the 4th March, 1891. 108. He was manager at the time of this balance-sheet ? —Yes,