The Sun.
London, England, 1849-02-24 00:00:00

Cbtrb Voittton

WATERFORD, WEXFORD, AND
WICKLOW RAILWAY.—(THIS DAY.)
EXTRAORDINARY PROCEEDINGS.
The half-yearly meeting of this company was con-
vened for twelve o'clock, at the offices, West Strand,
but at that hour not more than twelve shareholders were
present. After waiting for an hour an individual
entered the room and told these gentlemen that there
was not a sufficient number of proprietors present to
constitute the meeting, and it must, therefere, stand ad-
journed, sine die.
A PROPRIETOR asked the individual who he was ?
The INDIVIDUAL—What is that to you.
The PROPRIETOR—If you insult me in that way, sir,
I will ram my umbrella down your throat.
The INDIVIDUAL—Do it, sir ! Do it
Mr. Riesanns—Really that is not fair. No one has
the power to adjourn this meeting but the chairman.
Pray permit me to ask who you are?
The INDIVIDUAL—No. 12, Whitehall-place.—(Shame
and laughter.)
A PROPRIETOR—Oh, it's wasting time to ask this
man any question.
Mr. RICHARDS—Who has authorised you to attend
here and adjourn the meeting.
The INDIVIDUAL—I represent the solicitors, and I
shan't answer any impertinent question.
Mr. RICHARDS—I am not asking you impertinent
questions. Will you permit me to ask further who are
the solicitors ?
The INDIVIDUAL—Messrs. W. 0. Hunt and Son, but
there is no meeting and I shan't answer these questions.
Mr. RICHARDS said the gentleman had taken upon
himself the responsibility of adjourning this meeting,
and as neither Lord Courtown, the chairman of the
company, nor the secretary, nor any one of the directors
was present,:he felt that he had a right to ask, even as
a matter of courtesy, who had authorised the gentle.
man to proceed in the manner he had done. He would
ask whether the meeting could be put in possession of
the half-yearly report ?
' The INDIVIDUAL (who said he was Messrs. Hunt's
managing clerk)—Oh, I know nothing about your report,
It was then moved, that Mr. Nash should take the
chair, which led to a good deal of confusion, the indivi-
dual and a clerk in the office, threatening to Ball in
the police, and turn out the shareholders. The share-
holders persisted in holding a meeting, and when order
was restored,
Mr. Nasu proceeded to explain. the present position
of the company, which ho represented to be most deplor-
able. The directors were in the receipt of 1,0001. a
year, and the secretary, who had failed to attend, also
received 1,0001. a year for his services. The last ba-
lance-sheet of the company represented 13,0001. to be
in the hands of the bankers, but on inquiry it turned
out that there was only 1,0001.
The following resolution was then unanimously
agreed to :—" It being alleged, and appearing upon the
lace of the accounts, that the total capital originally
subscribed for was less than three-fourths, and that the
calljof 1847 has only been paid on about one-fourth of the
total capital, and the next call of 11. in March, 1848,
on 6,500 shares only, or about one-fifteenth of the total
shares,and that the alleged subscription of the South Wales
Company, for 11,200 shares, does not appear in the ac-
counts' or books, or as paid up, and that the bankers
had not in hand one. twelfth of the alleged balance, and
that the capital has been lent without the sanction of
the shareholders; resolved, that the accounts be re-
ferred to a committee of three, for investigation, with
liberty to report on the future prospects and management,
or the suspension or sale of the line, and to bring these
subjects before the Committee of the House of Lords,
now sitting on railway accounts."
Thanks were then voted to Mr. Nash, and the meet-
ing broke up; not, however, before it had been ascer-
tained that it was the secretary's clerk who had threa-
tened to call in the police, and turn out the share-
holders.

COMMON PLEAS.—(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings at Nisi Prins, at Guildhall, before the Lord
Chief Justice WILDE and a Special Jury.)
BROWN AND OTHERS, ASSIGNEES, V. NORRIS.
In this case Mr. Cockburn, Q C., Mr. Sergeant Wil-
kins, and Mr. Willes were counsel for the plaintiffs; and
Mr. Sergeant Byles and Mr. Warren represented the de-
fendant.

Mr. COCA BURN, in opening the case, said this was an
action brought by the plaintiffs, as assignees of Messrs.
Tanner and Ward, leather sellers, in Leadenhall-street,
to recover 3001. paid to the defendant Norris, as money
paid by what the law called a fraudulent preference. In
November, 1847, the baikrupts found themselves in
serious difficulties, so much so that 10,0001. was required,
not as he (Mr. Cockburn) believed, to;enable them to pay
all their liabilities, but to enable them to go on. The
bankrupts, by Mr. Tanner, one of the firm, made appli-
cation to Messrs. Streatfield and Co.,'for assistance, but
they told Tanner that in consequence of the severe
pressure, they could not discount their bills. Tanner
' then said he must stop payment. Lawrence, the partner
in the house of Streatfield and Co., who had the inter-
' view with Tanner, remonstrated with him for wishing
to stop payment, and said it was all nonsense, and that
he must go down to his father and brother in Devon-
' shire and get assistance from them. Tanner then went
down to Devonshire and got a conditional guarantee
signed by his father and brother for 6,000/., but it was
not to be used unless Messrs. Streatfield would advance
or guarantee an additional 4,000/., and promised to look
into the Messrs. Tanner and Ward's affairs and keep
them straight. On the morning of the 24th November it
was found Streatfield and Co. would not lend the other
4,0001.; and on the afternoon of the 24th Messrs. Tanner
and Ward stopped payment, and sent notice to one of
their bankers not to pay any more checks or
bills; and to the other of their bankers (for they
had two) they sent the same notice. They
did stop payment, and never resumed it again. The fist
did not issue until the 18th of February. On the 23d
of November, the day before they sent the notice to their
bankers, ho should be able to show that they paid 300/.
to Norris, and that was the amount sought to be reco-
vered. He (Mr. Cockburn) apprehended the law was,
that if a party on the eve of, and in contemplation of
bankruptcy, paid any sum of money to the exclusion of
his other creditors, that amounted to a fraudulent pre-
ference, if it was paid of their own free will, and not in
consequence of the pressure of the creditor. In this case,
so far from pressure, he should be able to show that they
actually sent the money to Norris's banker's volunta-
rily. On the 24th they also sent a cheque to
one Kempton for 430/. The partners took 2501.
apiece themselves, and sent 500/. to their solicitors.
On the 24th of November, he (Mr. Cockburn) believed
about twelve o'clock, they sent those cheques to the
bankers, and got the cash by a clerk named William
son, namely, one for 8001., one for 200/., one for 6001,
and one for 50/. It was out of the produce of one of
those cheques that they paid the present defendant,
and Kempton, themselves, and also their solicitors.
Mr. Thomas Lawrence proved, on the part of the
plaintiffs, that he is a member of the firm of Streatfield,
Lawrence, and Co., leather factors. In November,
1847, he was acquainted with Messrs, Tanner and Ward,
the bankrupts. Mr. Tanner's brother and witness
married two sisters. Before Tanner and Ward stopped
payment Tanner called upon witness for the purpose of
asking to, discount their bills. Witness told him:the
money market was such that he could not think
of parting with money to anybody, for he had got
enough to do to assist his own connexions. Tanner
then said, if he could not have the discount he must stop
payment. Witness ridiculed that notion, but Tanner
insisted on his inability to go on without assistance.
Witness told him to go down to his (Tanner's) father
and brother in Devonshire, who were men of large
wealth, and he (witness) had no doubt they would assist
him during the existing pressure. He then left witness,
who did not discount for him. Witness did not see him
again before he stopped payment.
Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant BYLES—Tanner's
father, who died recently, was a man of very large for-
tune; he died e.worih 100,000!. He had been in the
leather trade, but he had retired, and was upwards of 80
years of age. The old gentleman's credit was good in
the City to the extent of 20,0001., or any amount.
The case was proceeding when our report left.