The Sun.
London, England, 1849-04-12 00:00:00

Mr. Love—What means had the directors of ascer-
tainit.g whether the payment made to you on the 27th
October. 1846, of 31,10 A was correct, they not having
had any report made to thcm of your sale to the corn-
?—l have no ri7eollecti,m what ropresintaqoa was
ma.le to the directers, but I have no doubt that they
were in',rnyd that it had been expended in the purchase
of Great North of England shares.
Mr. Pr nee—Have you any objection to state to this
committee at what pLriol and under what circumstances
you became possessed of the Great North of England
shares you subequ,ntly sold to this company ?—To the
best o`' my recollection I bought every share in the open
market. through brokers, in the latter part of September
and the month of October, 1846.
Mr. Prance—Have you any objection to produce your
brokers' contracts?—l should have no objection if I had
them, but I have them not.
Mr. Prance—Have you any objection to state whether,
when you purchased the shares, they were transferred
into your own name?—l would like this question to be
repeated to-morrow.
SATURDAY, 7sla.ncx 10.
Mr. GEORGE HUDSON'S Examination resumed.
Mr. Hudson—ln answer to the previous question I
put in this paper. (The following; is a copy):—
" MR. HUDSON'S SHIRES.
" 1001. Shares-2 transferred to Messrs. Hudson,
Richardson, and Nicholson; 32 to Mr. Richard Nichol-
son; 117 t t Josh. Laurence in the first instance, and
from him on one deed to Mr. Hudson, Richardson, and
Nicholson: 151.
" 40/. Shares-342 transferred in the first instance to
Philip Cszenove, from him to Messrs. Hudson, Richard-
son, and Nicholson.
"301. Shares-13 transferred to Messrs. Hudson,
Richardson, and Nicholson; 78 to Richard Nichol-
son: 91.
"15/. Shares-46 transferred to Messrs. Hudson,
Richardson, and Nicholson; 1,241 to Mr. Richard
Nicholson; 1,537 to Josh. Laurence in the first instance,
and from him to Messrs. Hudson, Richardson, and
Nicholson: 2,874."

Mr. Clayton—. Mr. Plews stated that at the time of
the contract for the purchase of the Great North of
England Railway, and up to the passing of the Act of
July 27, 1846, for earning out that contract, you were
not registered as a holder of any shares in the Great
North of En;+la❑d Railway; were you directly or indi-
rectly intereited in any share in that railway at those
periods?—l had no interest whatever, either directly or
indirectly, nor did I gain one shilling by the purchase.
Mr. Clayton—With respect to the sale of shares by
you, Mr. Hudson, to the company, did it never occur to
you that there was an impropriety in your taking part
in fixing the prices at which these shares should be pur
chased?—No, nor do I think so still, provided I had
fixed a price at which it was advantageous for the com
pany to purchase at; I considered it nothing more than
the discounting of the company's bill, which must be
paid in July, 1850. Although I feel justified in the
course that I took, yet, before the statement of accounts
was made up of the Great North of England purchase, it
did occur to me that it was possible that some objec-
tions might be taken to the sale, and, although not then
conscious of any mistake, I stated my intention to Mr.
Close to have the accounts made out at the price the
shares actually cost me, as near as ho could ascertain;
but some few days after, upon a careful consideration of
411 the liabilities which I was under of a personal nature
for the company, having an action pending of 5,0001.,
And also having advanced 16,5001. for West Durham
ihare, both of whiTh liabilities, so far as they exist, I
came under solely and entirely for the benefit of the
company, I felt that, in justice to my own protection, I
ought not to give up that which I believed fairly be-
longed to me; but I believe when the mistake is cor-
rected, I shall not be a gainer of 1,0001. on the whole
transaction.

Mr. Prance—Are you not aware that the 85th clause
of the Companies Clauses Consolidation Act spe-
cially enacts that " No person holding an office or place
of trust or profit under the company, or interested in
any contract with the company, shall bd capable of
being a director, and no director shall be capable of
being interested in any contract with the company
during the time he shall be a director?"—l think in
this case, the Act of Parliament compelling the com-
pany to become purchasers, I had no recourse than
eventually to sell to them, as in the case of a railway
having power to take a director's land, the sale is com-
pulsory in both cases.
Mr. Love—Bat there is the peculiarity in this trans-
action that you purehasPd these shares after the poising
of the Great North of England Act, requiring the ade
of them to the York, Newcastle, and Berwick Company
on or before July, 1850. Why, therefore, did you not
purchase them in the first instance for that company, of
which you were chairman, instead of for yourself?—l
had nu authority at that time to purchase them.
Mr. Love—Can you put in any evidence of the cost to
you of the shares you sold to the company ?—I cannot do
,o at present, but will endeavour to do so before the com-
mittee closes.—(See Appendix.)
Mr. Prance—ln connexion with the question I last
addressed to you, is not clause 85 of the Railway Clauses
Consolidation Act also in harmony with the , general
principle of English law, that no trustee shall deal for his
own benefit with the property of his cestuique trust, and
also with the general law of broker and principal? —I
am not a lawyer, but your question does not in my mind
apply, as I am not only a trustee, but also as a large
shareho!der in the York, Newcastle, and Berwick Com-
pany, one of the cestuique trust, and, therefore, act in
both capacities; and the Act leaves me no option but
compels me to act as both.
MONDAY, MARCH 12.
Mr. CLOSE'S Re-examination resumed.
(Sundry Accounts exhibited.)
Mr. Love—Are these the accounts current of certain
transactions with Mr. Allhusen ?—Yes.

Mr. Love—Do thr y contain full particulars of the en-
tire sale, by Mr. Allbusen, to the company ?—Yes; I be-
lieve they do.
_ _

Mr. Love—And do they contain particulars of all
the payments to Mr. Allhusen ?—They do not contain
a paynr‘nt of 2,0001. made on the sth of May, 1847 ;
one of 1,000/, made on the 18th of May ; one of 8501.,
made on the 21st May ; one of 1591. 10s., made on 31st
thy.

Mr. Love—Have you Mr. Allhusen's receipts for these
four items ?—Y, s, I produce them.
Mr. Love—Have 3ou any contracts of sale from Mr.
Allhusen to the company ?—I am not aware of any,
out I will look through the correspondence with Mr.
Alth usen.

Mr. Prance—Have you received any reply to your
letter to Messrs. Laurence, Cazenove, and Co., asking
for duplicates of the original contracts T—l have not.
Mr. Love—Would you be so good as to inform this
committee whether the payment alleged to be paid to
C. Allhusen, of 6,0001., June, 8, 1848, and of 2,5001,
March 11, 1848, are entered in the ledger of the Great
North of England Purchase?—Yes; in pages 25 and 26
in the ledger.

TUESDAY, MARCH 13.

Mr. GEORGE HUDSON'S ft-examination resumed.
Mr. Prance—ln our examination yesterday of the
account of Mr. C. Ssttorthwaite, a letter from him was
presented to us, stating that the amount that he received
for 250 Great North of England 30/. shares was
16,6001., viz., fur the shares 16,500/., and 100/.ifor the
stamps; while the books of the company describe the
transaction thus;—" 250 301. shares, 16,4621. 10s. ;
stamps, 100/.; commission, 1001. Total, 16,662/. 10s."
Can you explain to the committee this apparent discre-
pancy?—l bought of Mr. Satterthwsite 250 shares at
661. per share. He brought them to my house at Albert-
gate. I gave him my own cheque on Glyn and Co. for
the money, and I am almost as unable to account for the
mistake as Mr. Close. The only probable solution of
the matter I can give is, that I recollect that, at about
that time, having requested him, Mr. Close, to pay 100/.
to my account, on account of travelling expenses. I find,
from a search of the books, that I have, not, for the last
fifteen or sixteen months, received one sixpense on that
account from the company; so that, in point of fact, the
mistake is 37/. 10g. against me. There was, undoubtedly,
no commission paid.