The Press.
London, England, 1858-08-14 00:00:00

THE PRESS, AUGUST 14, 1858.

intervene between this and 1984 some further pro
positions respecting the position of the company and
its dividends would be made by her Majesty's
Government, and it was most desirable that in their
corporate capacity they should be able to deal with
such proposition. The only other duty of the
directors would be to see that the dividends were
duly paid and the transfer of stock duly made.
There was a provision in the new act which provided
the funds for that purpose, but there was no provi-
sion for the mode in which the payment was to be
made. That would be the subject of arrangement
between the directors and the Government. He
had hoped that the Government would have ceded
to the company a part of the building in which they
were now assembled, but that was not the case ;
and unless the Government chamzsd its opinion,
they would have to look out for a place at the
London Tavern or elsewhere to hold their meetings.
A PROPRIETOR : At the expense of the Govern-
ment ?

Mr. If mrs : Yes. He had now mentioned all the
functions of the directors hereafter. It was neces-
sary that they should remain in existence, and he
hoped the Government would award the gentlemen
holding these offices some recompense for their
services.

In answer to Mr. Lewin,
21r. HELPS said that the proprietcrs would possess
their old privilege of summoning meetings ; but the
bill did not provide a place for holding such
meetings. He was sure that the Government would
not fail in so reasonable a feeling as that a company
which had created an empire should not expire on
terms highly penal.
A PROPRIETOR: If actions are brought against us,
who is to bear the expense ?
Mr. HELPS said that no fund was provided for the
company if actions were brought against it, but they
would have a defence by putting i❑ the ample release
given them by the act, and any persons suing them
would be defeated, and have to pay costs. There was
a further point connected with the duties of the
directors which must be adverted to, and that was the
power of reviving the commercial character of the
company. He did not see any great probability of
such action, but they certainly bad the power to
revive it. It might be advisable at some time—for
instance, when the Government gave them notice
that their stock would be paid off, it might be
desirable for the East India Company to enter into
commercial undertakings. What they would be he
could not say. There were great works in India
which they might undertake, and it was possible
they might adopt the business of bankers in London.
They had the power of meeting and petitioning under
their corporate seal, and if so great a mismanage.
ment of the affairs of India took place as to induce
them, as a company which he trusted would alwayo
retain great knowledge of and interest in India, to
remonstrate with the Government, they had the
means of doing so which unconnected individuals
could not possess.
In answer to Mr. Lewin,
Mr. HELPS said that his impression was that the
company bad no power to avail itself of its stock to
commence new commercial enterprizes. Whether
they had the power to ask the proprietors to subscribe
new stock was another question, but they had no
power to deal with their present capital stock.

Mr. CRAWSHAY said that as he understood the Act
of Parliament, at the expiration of thirty days from
its passing the directors appointed by the Crown
would cease to be directorQ, and those elected by the
proprietors would continue directors, although
members of the new council.

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said that there was a point
which required immediate attention. He wished to
know if notice was not given within the next twelve
months, did the proprietors lose all power of re-
demption of their stock until 1984?
The CHAIRMAN could not give a reply to that, which
was a legal question, but dealing with the fact as it
stood it did appear that notice must be given within
one year; and if not, their right to redemption lapsed.

Mr. LEWIN asked if a certain number of the
proprietors could call for the restoration of their
capital, and trade separately, while others did not.
The CHAIRMAN did not think he could be expected
to answer such a question without notice, but he sub-
mitted that, they cook( not.
A PROPRIETOR : Let the question be submitted to
the standing counsel of the company.
In answer to a Proprietor,
Sir J. W. HOOO said that he approved of the
suggestion that the questions which had been raised
to•day should be submitted to the standing counsel
of the company and the law officers of the Crown.
He would rather not venture on an opinion.

The CHAIRMAN said that, gathering what were the
wishes of the proprietors, the directors would do sill
in their power to outain the information required.
With regard to the question of remuneration to the
uture directors, and the retaining part. of the property
of the company, and as regarded a place of meeting,
Ile bad inentioned the subjeot to the President of the

B oird of Control, who had replied that all th
questions would be considered by him when the G• 1411
came into operation, and the Secretary of State had
power to make general arrangements.
Mr. CRAWSHAY said that reference had been made
to the Act of 1833 as to the repayment by Parliament
of the capital of the company in 1984. He wished to
know if Parliament was obliged to pay it or not, as it
thought proper.
The CHAIRMAN said that the question turned on the
meaning of the words " may be," and whether they
meant " must." He was no authority nn such a
point, and the question had better be asked of a
competent authority. If proprietors would make
notes of their questions they would be handed to the
solicitor of the company.
A PROPRIETOR said that their stock was invested
in the Dame of the company, and supposing it did
not amount to sufficient to cover the claims of the
company the Government ought not to he so dis-
honourable as to allow the loss to fall on individuals,
such as trustees, widows, and children, who would
suffer unless they were guarantee the stock they
had bought. He trusted the questions raised that
day would be answered in a distinct manner. Be
suggested that the proprietors should be alloired
time to consider the matter now discussed, and meet
again to considet, the whole of the questions brought
before them.

Mr. Caawsuav said ho believed that he should only
meet the wishes of the court if he moved that the
opinion of counsel be taken in reference to the legal
position of the company under the operation of the
new Act of Parliament. It was important that such
a document should be drawn up at once, in order
that every proprietor might understand his position
as a bolder of stock. He himself felt no difficulty in
the matter. He would state what he conceived
would be the position of a holder of East India
Company's stock. Their existence as a company
was not extinguished, because it was impossible to
do that under the clauses of the Act of 183;i, relating
to financial matters, which provided that if at any
time the company was deprived of the governmemof
India, they should be at liberty within twelve months
to give notice that in three years they would require
payment of their capital stock at the rate of 2001. for
1001. That notice could not be given by any
individual proprietor—it could only be done by them
as a corporation ; and it was necessary to have their
corporate existence continued. But then in twelve
months the company would have to decide whether
they would demand of the Government payment of
their capital, or whether they would leave themselves
in the hands of Parliament. If twelve months
should elapse, and the company did not exercise
its right, they would have no claim, except on
the revenues of India, and if they were de-
clared insufficient to meet the payment of dividends
Parliament might say," You had the option of claiming
payment of your capital, and as you did not avail
yourselves of it, yon have no right to claim it now."
NVltat Parliament might do in 1984 depended on the
word " may." He believed they could do what they
pleased, and it was for the proprietors to consider
whether they would leave their property secured
only on the revenues of India. He was not willing
to leave it so secured. The putting the words relating
to the " revenues of India " into the Act of Parliament
had hoaxed and swindled tne company. What the
people of England did not understand—for if they
had they would not have allowed the bill to pass—
was, that it was a question whether if hereafter there
Was a deficiency in the revenues of India, it was to
be made up out of the revenues of England. That
was a grave question, and one affecting the national
credit. There could not be a defalcation in the
revenues of India without derangement of the credit
of England. He thought that the opinion of council
should be taken and laid before the court on all the
points which had been raised, and that a committee
of directors and proprietors should be appointed to
confer on the subject. He would make a motion to
that effect.
The CHAIRMAN suggested that a sub committee of
proprietors should be appointed to draw up a series
of questions to which the court desired to have
answers ; that the directors be requested to take mea-
sures to have those questions answered by the standing
council of the company and the law officers of 'he
Crown, and that immediately after the answers were
received a court of proprietors should be convened to
consider what measures should be taken on the
answers to these legal questions. As time pressed,
it should be done without delay ; the sub committee
should meet immediately, draw up the questions, awl
the directors would use all despatch to have them
answered.
After some discussion, Mr. CRAWSHAY moved :
That a sub-committee of proprietors be appointed tont
in concert with the chairman, deputy-chairman, and board
of directors, for the purpose of obtaining couusel's opinion
as to the position of the company under previous sere, s 8
.
well as the present; and more especially as to the Ws'
ti nn of the proprietors of East India Stock and the
creditors of the company, I iidian as well asCurupea2:....
This was wood to awl a a ablomptittee sPrinw4%