The Express.
London, England, 1852-10-22 00:00:00

NEW ZEALAND COMPANY.

A meeting of the proprietors of this company, ad-
journed from several previous occasions—the lust being the
7th inst.—was held yesterday at the Alcor in Broad-
street-huildings, to make provision for certain promissory
notes held by the Union Dank of Australia, and tilling due
,on the let of December next, amounting to 14,4601.,
given by the director.* on account of a debt of 14,9871 61. 24.,
with ioterest, incurred in reference to the Canterbury
Association, and thus to avoid the nteessity of making a
tall on the unpaid-up elicits' of the compa.,y.
Mr. AOLIONBY, M.P., the chairman of the company, pre-
sided.

Ihe minutes baring been read and confirmed, rind the
chairman having briefly stated the object of the meeting,
General Manna sold as he understood the meeting
had been called by the directors for the purpose of consider-
ing the most desirable way of providing the means of
meeting certain liabilities in order to avoid the nere,ity for
• cull. (Heir, bear.) On that point two questions occurred
to him. He was advised that accordinq to the act 11 and 12
Vic., on three months' notice being given iii April, WO, to
one of the Secretaries of State, all the powers and privilege.
of the company ceased, except 'such as were no reesary to
enable them to receive and distribute certain funds men-
tioned, and to close the company's elf.eirs. In the first
placc,he wished to know whether the f4iieti.ns of the board
and of the company had ceased in Ju;y, 1840, aecorling to
such notice ?

The CHAIRMAN—Yrs, certainly ; t leept fur the purposes
expressly stated in the ace.
General Batt:Gs—Those arc to emit& them to receive
moneys and d' bute them, and to wind up the accounts.
The CHAIRMAN—Yes; " to adjust and close the affairs
of the company," is the expression.
General Ilan.Gs—Then I may assume that the ..hairs
of the company, not having been closed, the directors
and the company are a body capabio of transacting any
business connected with th. it affairs ?

The CH atustax—Not caactlyso. Yrceions to lock, the
New Zealand Cuntpany possessed wrious funrtiurs con-
nected with the colony of New Zealand, as the power to
acquire land, to send ships, and to connote. Th. se hieing
ceased ; we cannot send out ships to colonise, our tan we
deal with the waste lands.

General Batons—Bat you can make calls under the
powers of the original act, it appears.
The CIIAIUMAN—Yes, hut only for the purpose of ad-
jubting and closing the disits of the company.
General Batons consid, red the shareholders were en-
titled to know whether or cot there was really any n, eessity
for making the proposed call. (liter.) At the .a,t meet-
ing he wt.' ir.4 in a position to say an:ithing on the subject,
not having had an opportunity of looking into the accounts.
Since that he had called at the office and examined them,
and had discovered numerous discrepancies, which he had
described in a letter to Mr. Liall, who had pre.ide.? ,in the
previous occasion, but who, it appeared, in consegirnee of a
misdirection, had not received it early enough to nd any
reply. It seemed, as he understood, that tho directors
owed to the Ilion Bank of Austraht nbo•tt 16,000 t.
The CHAIRMAN —A!ntoat 17,0001, including the in-
terest.

General Buteea About 17,0001, then, nn ."1 this
had been incurred by the connexion of the eurhio,,y with
the Canterbury settlement.
The CHAlRMAN—Certainly.
General Blooms thought it was very much to be r, -fretted
that the affairs of the two convene s hid not hi, a kept
separate. However, he had dissected the accaunts as well
as he could, and he found that the New Zealand Company
had advanced between the sth April, 1819, sod the date of
the lest report 26,8151. Ils. 81., and that they had received
10,6254.165. 4d., leaving a alance remaining due on
account of Canterbury of 13,9891. 4.1. (Hear, hear.)
It appeared, also, that they had borrowed 10,0002 of one of
the directors, on the faith of unpaid up calls, which had
been paid beck out of the 10,6231. received from the Canter-
bury Association.
The CHAIRMAN—The 10,0001. was borrowed to pay bills
held by the Union Bank on account of Canterbury.
Gen, BRI(108—At all events, there was a balance over of
15,9891., which was about the sum now owing to the bank.
It appeared to him that tho Canterbury AssociaVen was
supported by borrowed capital. In the general ace amts of
the sth April, 1817, there WAS an item of 9,4831. 3s 4.1. under
the bead of cash balance in hand entered as promissory notes,
In the following year that item was divided into two, one
part of it appearing as bills of exchange, but the gram
amount being the same; this was in the report as audited
by the company's auditors, but in the report for the same
year u audited by the government commissioner no account
was taken of it at all. lu a snheequent report it appeared
under the head of " debts due," making, with en item of
sundries, 15,2832 under that head ; and in the 26th report,
the debts due were put down at 12,6011 and odd, the entry
bf 9,4630' promissory notes " having lapsed altogether.
In the next report, the amount due on account of t..e Can-
terbury settlement was stated at 15,0001. odd, so that the
company must have had debts due to it in May, 1850,
amounting to 27,9001. In the 28th report, the assn's were
stated at 14,4571., inclulng the 9,483/. ; and in the 29th
report, no part of this debt of 14,400/. appeared to
have been paid; consequently the e mapany must
have at this moment debts due to it in this
country amounting to 14,4L7/ , besides 14,6101. in
New Zealand, making a total of 29,1331. 7a. sd. Under
the act, all the lands, tenements, and hered..aments
vested In the company when it functions mined, reverted
to the crown, but the crown had no claim to the other
meets of the company, and certainly not to thi..29,0n0t.
With regard to the Canterbury question, the act made the
company liable for any contracts as to the lands, or liabili-
ties in regard to the settlement of Nelson, or liabilities in-
curred during the suspension of instructions, with the sanc-
tion of the commission( r. Now, the Canterbury scheme was
either contracted with the commit of the commissioner and
the government, or without it. If with that consent, then
1 the shareholders were not liable; and if not, it was neces-
sary to know by whose consent such liability h id been
incurred. The accounts in their present ship. ho con-
sidered most unsatisfactory, and he hoped the shareholders
would make no responeu to the demand of the directors for
a call until they received full explanation. In eonclueion, he
submitted a resolution,to the effect that *committee of share-
hold era be appointed to examine the accounts and transactions
of the company and to report thereon—aed to report also
bow far it might appear to them requisite to make au call
on the shereholders, and that in order to carry out these
objects all accounts and papers belonging to the company
be referred to them—that they have liberty to eximine any
officer of the company, and to call far such other assistance
as they might consider necessary, tin expense of ,tieh in-
vestigation to be defrayed out of the general funds.
Mr. Becuts seconded the resolution, and in doing so
wished to offer some observations on some of the points
named to in the report. It seemed to hint that in some
the character of the company was in question. Ho
Mns
ressileeted the debate in the House of Commons last
amiss ma the subject of the New Zealand Company, and
he observed in the report that the directors stated they
gave such answers on that occasion to the misrepresentations
end charges of fraud with which the company was assailed
•• sid&l have been anticipated. Those charges of fraud
and daan misrepresentations which were brought by Sir
W. liolieworth in parliament against the company were
supported by • reference to the alleged conduct of
the rs on a particular occasion. He (Mr. Budele)
did not answer for the directors—they had the op-
portunity of doing that for themselves in the same
when the charges were made, but on behalf of the
lders he must Pay that if any fraud or iniql.epresen-
Intim had been used not only had they no priority in the
matter, but they were utterly and entirely igucrant of any
sad every misrepresentation that might have been made
es the evasion referred to. Ile was astonished that a
▪ like Sir W. Molesworth should have brought forward
seek charges based on such a foundation, via., certain state-
ments made by some particular director on some particular
seeuion, which statements, he might add, had not yet been
proved to be misrepresentations. (Hear, hear.) If any
fraud had been practised on the government, or any mine-
tation made, it w by Sir W. Molesworth's late
=' Mr. Chad's Buller.
ler. (Hear, hear.) This he felt
Imendllli say is to the director, end in justice to the
MOW. C. Buller, let him add that he had discussed the
leiellee of the Nelson settlement with that right honourable
end highly talented gentleman, and that Mr. Buller told
him Oat, differing,* he did from his (Mr. 'Waite's) views,
le maid not be expected to lay the case before the govern-
ment in the lame way that he would do if he concurred
with him. But the statement made by Mr. Buller was
made with • full knowledge of the facts, the directors
having kept back nothing. (Hear, hen.) He now came
to another matter in the report which more immediately
affected the question before the meeting. The Canterbury
Association, as they were aware, were the Debtors of the
company ; and Goy knew also that they had repudiated
the debt. (Hear, hear.) He considered that the direftore
were fully justified in the use of the word repudiated "in
speaking of this transaction—(hear)—but he thought it
necessary that the meeting should know a little more of the
ground of such repudiation, although that groued wasstated
in the report. The Canterbury Association asserted that
the New Zealand Company had misrppropriuted a part of
the public money—that was what, he believed. they celled
it—or, at any rate, a part of the money borrowed Com the
public—to purposes inconsistent with the act, and had
applied it to their own private purposes—and they made
this charge of misappropriation the ground fur not paying
the money which the New Zeeland Company had lent them.
This certainly was a moat extraordinary answer fur a
borrower to give when calli d upon to pay. (Hear,
hear.) If there had been any suet, misappropriation
that would be • proper subject ler inquiry as be-
tween the shareholders and the directros of the
New Zealand Company, but it could have nothing
to do with the Canterbury Association. (Hear.) The
meeting would be still more surprised when they were told
that Mr. Edward Gibbon Wakefield—who was well known
to have been the prime mover of the Canterbury Associa-
tion—not a member of the committee. but the secret mover
of all the machinery—that he (Mr. Wakefield) himself r

re-
wrieTeddpnetief.the morsel, to the meant, u he (Mr.
Buckle) of 1,0001. (Hear, hear.) Ant yet after
this the Canterbury Association, including 'itch men u
Lord Ripon, Lord Lyttletou, Mr. Simeon, and Mr. Caven-
dish, made it a ground for repudiating a debt the justice of
which they could not dispute, that certain funds hid been
misappropriated by their creditors. But to chow how weak
even wit this ground, it wit necessary only to say that the
money advanced to the Canterbury ANsociation by the New
Zealand Company was money borrowed by the latter com-
pany, not from the governmmt—or at least the greater
part of it—bet borrowed partly from one of the
directors, and partly from the Bunk of Australia.
10,0001. of it was adverted by the Baron Goldsolunidt, one et
the directors, and the remainder, or nearly so, wit advanced
by the Bank ; so that if the ground ot unsoppropriating
publio money were tenable, it was thus s • e;,t learn under
the Canterbury Association. (Cheers) Ile believed the
feat we. that when the company borrowed the money front