The Express.
London, England, 1853-12-31 00:00:00

BRITISH AUSTRALIAN GOLD MINING

COMPANY.

Yesterday a general meeting of the shareholders
of this company, summoned by the committee appointed on
the 10th inst. to investigate the accounts, was held at the
London Tavern, for the purpose of considering the steps to
be taken in consequence of the committee cf management
having refused to give any information as to the pecuniary
position of the company.
Mr. WILLIAM iIaNDERBON presided.
Mr. GUEDALLA (a member of the Shareholders' Com-
mittee) rose to propose the first resolution, which declared
that the London committee of management having re-
peatedly declined to furnish any account of the money
expended or invested, and not having called the share-
holders together in July, 1853, as promised in January in
that year, their conduct was unjustifiable, and that the
shareholders have no confidence in them. He observed,
that all the information the shareholders could gather
reached them from their friends at Sydney, or from the
Sydney papers, instead of from their own directors. In
some of those papers it had been stated that Mr. W. Faw-
cett produced letters to the directors in England, to show
that he was authorised by his brother and Mr. Hargreaves
to negotiate the company in London, and upon the strength
of thorc letters he got his 25,000 free shares ; but that when
he arrived in Australia, both hie brother and Mr. Her-
g
denied having given him any authority what-
ever ; so that the inference was that the letters were
forged. It appeared also, from the samo source,
that the London Committee of Management, when they
heard of this, sent out another agent, and called upon Mr.
Fawcett to ehe back the shares, but he had refused, and
when legal proceedings were taken against him he appealed
against the decision, and carried the case into another court.
He looked upon these gold mining schemes as artfully got-
up lottery tickets of a pound each—in fact, they were no
better than the betting shops which got people's money,
and when the time came to look for the return the shutters
were put up and all was found out. (A laugh.) If the
directors had been deceived, which was the most charitable
view to take of the came, they ought to have coma forward
and stated the whole truth, and the shareholders would
have been (as shareholders almost always were) disposed to
give them credit for good intentions, and have made the
best they could of the matter. But to expect they
would allow them to go on spending all the money that had
been subscribed without rendering any account was not
common sense. It turned out that all the statements upon
which the company had been formed were untrue, and
that there was neither a company in existence at Sydney
at the time, nor had the land been secured on lease as
stated. He was not in favour of Chancery proceedings, for
the reasons Mr. Henderson had given, but the time had
arrived when some decided step must be token. (Hear.)
Mr. BURNAM) wished to know the number of shares
subscribed for by the gentlemen who signed the application
to the directors ?

The CHAIkMAN-It was sinned by the five members of
the committe, but I cannot say how many shares they hold.
Id,. BuirwAnn—Was it more than 400 ?

The CHAlRMAN—Certainly. Very many more—some
thousands of shares were reiwesented by the committee.
Mr. CHARNOCI, a member of the Shareholders' Com-
mittee, seconded the resolution. . . .

Mr..BURNARD suggested kia an amendment that a requi-
sitien should be sent to the directors, in accordance with
the bye-laws, to call a public meeting of the shareholders,
and he had reason to knew that if that were done they
would comply.
The CHAIRMAN considered that, under the circumstances,
they were not bound by the bye-laws.
Mr. ASHIJEST, a solicitor, said he represented more
than 1,000 shares, and believed there was a rule requiring
that any requisition to the directors should be signed by 30
shareholders, representing one-fourth of the whole number
of shares. As they had accepted their shares subject to
the rules and bye-laws, he recommended that in
any step they took they should comply with them
as far as they knew them. At present there was
no proof, nor even any reason to oppose that the
directors were in any way connected with the fraud which
had been said to have been committed by Mr. Fawcett. Re
thought if the directors were determined to set the share-
holders at defiance, it would be difficult to take proceedings
successfully against them either in law or equity, and he,
therefore, would suggest that they should endeavour to ob-
tain the information they required by friendly means, and
if they should refuse to call a meeting he would advise even
that they should wait until March, when the directors had
promised to call a meeting, rather than that
,any hostile
proceedings should be taken. (Oh, oh.)
Mr. KENNEDY moved the amendment as suggested by
Mr. Barnard, that a requisition be sent to the directors to
call a meeting within 21 days.
The CHAIRMAN thought no argument bad been brought
forward to justify the amendment, but he was willing to
give up his own private feelings and vote for it, provided it
was understood that if the directors did not call the meeting
within the time stated, or afford the information re-
quired, they should then pus a vote of want of confidence
in them.
Mr. GVEDALLA would also oa that understanding support
the amendment, and withdraw his motion.
The original motion was then withdrawn, and the amend-
ment was put and carried.
Mr. Gauze thought it would give the committee of
sbaralioldees additional power, and enlist the committee of
the Stock Ezehange in their favour, if they pared a reso-
lution whieh he would now move, via. that the time had
arrived when the attention of the committee of the Stock
Exchange should be called to the manner and circum-
stances under which the various gold mining shares have
been placed upon the Stock Exchange list, with the view of
expunging from the list the shares of all schemes of a
fraudulent character.
Mr. Busuraan and Mr. Mannar thought the resolution
went somewhat further than was included in the duties of
the present meeting; and the Chairman also being of
opinion that it would be better for the meeting to confine
themselves to the business of their own company, declined

to put it. .
Mr. ORRIN insisted that it should be left to the meeting
whether it should be put or not.
Mr. POULTON seconded the resolution, and insisted upon
its being put.
It was also supported by Mr. Cliansocg ; and Mr.
GOEDALLA having spoken in favour of it, adding that it
was only justice to the Stock Blehenge to say that they
were now, it the eleventh hour, ready to give all the in•
formation in their power, but they knew no more of the
British Australian Gold Company than the shareholders
themselves,
The CHAIRMAN took a show of hands upon the question
whether the resolution should be put or not; and the deci-
sion being in the afHrm►tive, it was put and carried by a
large majority.
The proceedings then terminated.