The Sun.
London, England, 1847-08-13 00:00:00

IkT9 "L ONDONI
4..

Then there was ae account of 1,3951. 3s. 4d. for " print-
ing, advertising, stationery, and utility, from rev ty
cosh He should like to know how much of thet the
stationer had received ; but when he fi,und that he had
only received 2001. during the last 10 years, he wished
to have some explanation.
The CHAIRMAN said the law expenses included the
expenses of obtaining Bills and the sums paid to Parlia-
mentary agents.
Mr. ELKINS said that was exclusive of the 1,000/. now
claimed by the solicitor.
Mr. CURTIS, the solicitor to the Market Company,
said 4501. had been paid to the Parliamentary agents.
Mr. ELKINS said it _appeared that 821/. 3s. 3d. had
been paid to the Parliamentary agents, and that the total
of the law expenses was 4,135/. 2s. 9d., exclusive of the
1,000/. claimed. He concluded by suggesting the rejec-
tion of the report, and the removal of the directors of
whom they had reason to complain.—(Hear.) He pro-
posed a motion to the effect that the reported be rejected.
Dr. MOoRE seconded the motion. He said he never
saw a document so deserving of censure, and it was most
discreditable to the persons whose names were attached
to it. It did not even give a clear idea what their lia-
bilities were.
Mr. FEW said, at the last meeting Mr. Curtis stated
that out of the 550/. placed opposite his name, 4501. had
been paid to the Parliamentary agents ; but as there
was no record of the 450/. in the archives of the com-
pany, it was impossible for them to record it. The law
expenses, amounting to 4,0001., did not appear to him much
for eleven years. They could not, owing to the limited
time, obtain the exact amount of the outstanding liabi-
lities, and they felt that they could not state liabilities
which had no existence. They had done their best ;
and as they appeared to have discharged a very thank-
less task, he would second any motion having for its ob-
ject the appointment of any other persons to make a
second investigation.
Mr. LANCASTER, one of the committee, defended the
report of the accosentsrand considered them such as any
gentleman or accountant could understand. They were
correct to a few pounds, and were such as he should
make out with respect to his private affairs. As they
required money they must give the directors power to
raise it.
Mr. BLUNT said, at first he declined to act, but as he
found that a quorum could not be made up without him,
he had stayed in town for the purpose of attending the
meetings of the committee. He was not even on speak-
ing terms with any of the directors.
Mr. LANCASTER said he was not acquainted with his
colleagues until he met them at the meetings of the com-
mittee.
Mr. STUTELEY considered that no imputation rested
on the committee. He objected to the report on other
grounds—that the g, ntlemen who composed it had not
had time to consider and obtain all the accounts they
required. The object of the appointment of the com-
mittee was expressly for the purpose of understanding
the exact amount of the liabilities. They had not had
time to ascertain them, and although he had not the
slightest wish to repudiate any account which they
owed, he considered that they should defer any further
proceedings until the amount of these liabilities were
made known. He, howeVer, believed their report per-
fectly correct. The attendance of but two gentlemen on
more than one occasion was an additional reason why
they should not receive the report. He objected to it
alste because it did not specify how they were to raise
the money requ ired, and if they adopted the suggestion
they threw out,they would leave a dangerous discretion
in the hands of the directors, for they could not forget
that they were individually responsible for what-
ever money they raised in their name. He
had some suspicion that ulterior proceedings
were intended, but he could not further allude to them.
He objected to the last clause of the report most
strongly, because they would, to carry it out, be obliged
to go again to Parliament, at an expense of 5,000/. or
6,0001. If there was to be a vote for every five shares,
his Learned Friend (Mr. Few) would have at least sixty
votes. By a former-arrangement between the two com-
agmedongthsat tin2doiovidsuhatilrepsaritniest,heanbdridtgl;
spbaenuields,
beit wasdiv arranged n
arrangement was on the minutes of the bridge directors.
(Cheers.) And after this, they were told that those
tobv:()lter.e—ee(nL.eodtutlbeehsebearrs.e)e
on
nf he had
former
occasion, had
the n
choar, right
andh t
occasion, he should not have refused them.—(Hear,
hear.) He should have stated his objection to them, but
ii
he should have declined to be a party to litigation on
the subject, and, consequently, to expense to the Bridge
Company. lie should use his influence to oppose the
motion.
Mr. LANCASTER said that the committee apprehended
that the last clause would have given great satisfaction.
Mr. HAWES said an arrangement was made with the
Market Company, by which two of its directors were to
have seats at the Bridge Company board, but they had
refused to attend.—(The Hon. Gentleman read the mi-
nutes to the effect stated.)—This was the whole of the
arrangement with respect to the 200 shares referred to.
Mr. FLADGATE inquired if that was the whole of the
arrangement ?
Mr. HAWES said it was.
Mr. FLADGATE then: emphatically read an extract
from the minutes, dated the 11th of July, 1840, showing
that the 200 shares had been apportioned to several par-
ties, all of whom were to be entitled to vote. It was
signed by Mr. Hawes as one of the directors.—(Cries of
" Shame.")
Mr. HAWES did not gainsay the truth of the extract.
It appeared, ho.' ever, that the arrangement was incon
cistent with the Act of Parliament. They had always
attended the meetings and voted ; but when he found
from the opinions of Mr. Fitzroy Kelly that they w. re
illegal, he felt that he could not undertake to receive
them. There had been no desire on his part to prevent
the Market Company from exercising all the privileges
conferred upon them by the Act of Parliament. The
62d clause provided that they should have no more than
five votes in their incorporated capacity. That he was
in error remained to be. proved. Looking at the large
amount of law expenses, and the various Acts of Parlia-
ment which they had obtained, he did not think 4,800/.
too much for the eleven years. If they would refer to
the short-hand writer's notes of the former meetings,
they would find that he stated he was ready to retire,
and that it he was elkts d he should pursue the course
he had heretofore adopted. The parties in favour of a
committee wished for an impartial tribunal ; but four
of them were personal friends, and the other three had
singed a circular, which had been distributed. He ob •
served at the time that the Parliamentary useee was to
appoint the mover of a committee as one of its members;
he proposed that the same course should be adopted,
and proposed three on one side and three on the other ;
and if all the parties had acted it would have been an
impartial committee. The committee might or might
not have been appointed legally, but, having been ap-
pointed, he thought they were hound to receive the result
of their labours, and to place it on their minutes. Al-
though he had recently had no time to look at it, as
far as he could understand' it he agreed with it, and he
should support it.
Tne CHAIRMAN said the committee bad done all they
could have done in the limited time allowed them, and
as far as he was enabled to judge they had conducted
the investigation with the greatest impartiality. That,
however, was not the question—it was this, whether
the report should be received or not.
Twenty-five hands were held up for its reception, and
thirty-six against it.
Mr. HAWEs demanded a poll ; and as the time for the
second meeting had arrived, moved a resolution con-
firmatory of the one agreed to at the last meeting, for
the purpose of seising 20,0001. by the creation of new
shares. He said at the last meeting the mode in which
they proposed to raise the money was clearly stated.
The shares of the company were now at a premium,
and, according to the Act, under such circumstances
they must first be offered to the shareholders. If they
were not taken by the shareholders the directors were
prepared to use them for the purpose of raising' a loan
on the best terms they could. They proposed at first to..
'apply a portion of the money thus raised to liquidate the
claim of the Excheqiier Commissioners, by which the
wharf which they held as security would be released;
next, to a.:vertise for loans on debentures to discharge
the other claims. The liabilities amounted to 20,000/.,
9,0001. of which must be repaid at once to Messrs.
Jackson. No further sums were asked for beyond those
expended on the works. Alportionlof the money re -
ceived from Messrs. Jackson was applied to reducing the
loan of the Commissioners. If they had given the direc•
tors rower to raise the money on the last occasion, they
might have obtained it at one-half per cent. cheaper than
at the present moment, but they would now make the
best bargain they could. The creation of the quarter
shares would, no doubt, accomplish this object.
Mr. FEW seconded the motion, and said they would
lose 1,000/. on the contract with Messrs. Jack; on unless
they paid the money within the present month. If there
was to be a contest upon any motion, he begged of them
not to let it apply to this item, but to something which
would not injure their pockets. Let them, at least, save
the 1;000/.
Mr; STUTELEY said it was unnecessary for him to
say much with respect to the motion, as the opinion he
expressed on the subject at the last meeting remained
unaltered, namely, to increase the capital of the com-
pany. Less dividend would accrue if the capital was
nintmi
ded e
he w ahsadde no doubt
raised. objected to the report of the committee, be-
cause they htet tailed to point out any new plan by which
mimey might be raised without serious detriment to the
w.shareholders,_enh which he confessed was a question with
deeply
m priehsesesdh.ar,B,sywt,hmeldcobuerinseatrearcirli;
reduced. lie di
•
raise did not object to giving the directors
Power to
moue b
• debentures. No doubt some
arrangement could 3be come to with the bankers and
Messrs. Jackson,
were decided No doubt, by the time the liabilities
He, lbr one, with means would come in to liquidate them.
After au that view. would forego his dividends.
eighth shares, unimportant discu • • h
discussion with respect to the
Dr. MOORE said. ho believed
truly that at the last meeting there was not a
lution. He wished to knraosaviorty in favour of the reso-
stances the proceedings at that whether under the circum-
The CnatesrAst .said if ;It meeting were regular?
meeting were irregular,' thtaltewproceedings at the last
ought not to confirm the resoluationa• reason why they
matter to inquire whether there ,it was a fitting
or not. was any irregularity
Mr. HAWES said, no doubt, if the proprietors
forego their dividends a considerable would
sum would be
raised. The bankers-demanded immediate payment.
The CHAIRMAN—Then you must go elsewhere.
Mr. HAWES—:I have not the slightest objection.
After saying that he never was at a meeting at which
such disgraceful insinuations were thrown out as those
used by Mr. Eiltins, be proceeded to say that unless
they immediately liquidated Messrs. Jackson's claim
they would lose 1,0001. They were in debt, and
they must pay it, and the honest way to look at the
matter was not by considering what loss would be caused
to their shares. If they negatived the motion they
would place the directors in an expensive and painful
position.
Mr. Uneenza, said be had not been is the habit of