The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-03 00:00:00

is "
,

SOUTHAMPTON, MANCHESTER.
AND OXFORD RAILWAY
'MEETING •OF PROPRIETORS.
A meeting of the Proprietors in the above-named under-
taking was held at the King's Arms, Palace-yard, at 12
o'clock, on Saturday, for the purpose of enabling the directors
to explain to the company theirpresent position. The meet-
ing was numerously attended, and the chair was taken by Mr.
Muntz, M.P. the chairman of the Board of Directors, at 12
o'clock presisely.
The CHAIRMAN said that the shareholders had been
called together under circumstances of a rather peculiar nature.
The directors could have wished that this meeting had been
called for the purpose o f enabling the shareholders to say what
line of conduct should be pursued preparatory to the final
close of this undertaking, ; but as it unfortunately happened
that they were placed in very difficult circumstances, in con-
sequence of suits which had been instituted against them—
upon grounds which were true' r not true—that could not
be done. The directors were p ced in a position of extreme
difficulty, inasmuch as they . ere charged with having
hitherto misconducted themselves without having the
means of correcting or contradicting that report, and they
thought that they should be justified in calling the present
meeting for the purpose of explaining their conduct to the
shareholders before the courts of law had passed their judg-
ment upon them. After the directors had explained their
position to the shareholders, they would only be too glad to
bring this concern to a final close and settlement, as speedily
as possible.. As far as regarded himself, he could say most
decidedly that he wished, from various circumstances which
he would relate to them, that he had never had taken any
part in the undertaking. Under the present state of liti-
gation in which the company had been placed, it became a
serious matter to know how they should act. The directors
were advised that it was quite impossible for the scrip-holders
to take any share in the close or winding up of the affair—
that in fact the shareholders were the only parties who could
take any part in it. The directors had no wish to bide any-
thing from the company; their desire was to give as full an
explanation as possible of the pr— at prospects of the com-
pany. As, the presentswa ring -which• bad been
legally called, . and his charaefeT had been aspersed for
the part which he had taken in this affair, lie wished to
explain in a very brief manner the part which he had taken
in this undertaking. He had never taken any part in any
railroad undertaking previously, nor would be ever have
connected himself with the present had it not been for the
circumstances which he would briefly detail to the meeting.
In August last, he received a letter from a Mr. William
Parsons, in which that gentleman submitted to him a
project to form a railway which should connect Southampton
with the North west of. England and North Wales. In that
letter Mr. Parsons informed him that he had obtained the
sanction and assistance of many influential gentlemen in
London for the formation of such a line, and he suggested
to him (the Chairman) that as he was the representative in
Parliament of the town of Birmingham, through which the
line would pass, his name would be of great weight; and he,
therefore, requested permission to place his name amongst
the directors of the proposed undertaking. He represented
also' that there would be no competing line, and that the
profits • would 'be unusually great, as it would be a direct
line, connecting some of the most important towns in Eng-
land and Wales. He (the Chairman) replied to that letter,
requested to be furnished with a prospectus of the under-
taking, and stating most distinctly that he. had never con-
nected himself with any undertaking. He was unwilling to
take any part in this, but as it was represented to him by
the writer, that his doing so would be of service to the people
of Birmingham, he had no objection to take shares, in it if
there was no rival line. Mr. Parsons, in reply to
that letter said, that lie found that •he had erred
in saying that there was no competing line, for
since the date of his first letter, he found that there was
another undertaking of a similar description with which his
(the Chairman's) colleague (Mr. Spooner) had allowed him-
self to be connected, and with which he also took every
prominent part. On the 21st of August, Mr. Parsons again
wrote to him, stating that several noblemen and gentlemen
(including Lord Rossmore, Colonel Westenra, &c.) had au-
thorised him to place their names on the provisional com-
mittee. He also said that he was promised the support of
Lord Carnarvon, and other noblemen, and that be had
an interview .with a gentleman who was intimately ac-
quainted with Mr. Spooner, and other gentlemen of the rival
line, and who would succeed in inducing them to give their
sanction to their undertaking, and withdraw it from the
rival line. The next letter he received from Mr. Parsons
was dated the 26th of August. In that letter he had been
advised to bring the present undertaking before the public at
once, as the rival undertaking had not been abandoned,
and also that the line should be considered as a purely com-
mercial undertaking. He also stated that he had succeeded
in obtaining permission to add Mr. Spooner's name to the
provisional committee, and he would take the liberty of put-
ting his (the Chairman's) name at the head of the committee
of management, requesting him 'at the same time to favour
him with his presence at a meeting of the proprietors as soon
as convenient. On the 29th of August Mr. Parsons again
wrote to him (the Chairman) with an amended prospectus,
which he said he intended laying before the public, but in that
prospectus the most important names on the provisional
committee had been left out. He stated in that letter that
the rival undertaking had been brought before the
public, but that it was impossible that it could
succeed, inasmuch as that which he had projected would
afford precisely the same accommodation as that contem-
plated by the other line, and at the same time save the public
1,100,0001., and preserve what he called the bard-earned
rights of other companies. .Now, the fact was, that he (the
Chairman) did not positively know, until that time, that a
rival undertaking would be started, for had he anticipated a
.4.,0l Eno he would not have taken the least part in this
undertaking.
A PROPRIETOR--I think you.had then a very good oppor-
tunity of withdrawing from the concern, and exposing tho
individual who had brought it forward as having made state-
ments to you which were not founded on facts, he having said
that this scheme was the only one which was then existing.
I merely make that remark to give you an opportunity of
explaining the reasons why you did not withdraw.
The CHAIRMAN—Perhaps it will be saving the time of all
parties if I should be allowed to proceed with my statements.
If the company think that I should not make the explana-
tion, I will not make it, but I think that I should have an
opportunity of clearing my character.—(Cries of "Go on.")
The Chairman then continued to say that he received another
letter front Mr. Parsons, in which he stated that the applica-
tions for shares were immense, that the time for applications
would be limited to ten days, but that the directors need not
trouble themselves by applying, as care would be taken that'
shares were allotted to them. On the 6th of September he
received another letter from him, requesting hint to attend a
meeting of the company at Swindon that day, and that Mr.
Attwood.had also promised his support to the undertaking,
and leading him (the Chairman) to believe that the rival
line had been abandoned. On the 30th of September he re-
ceived a circular from the secretary, stating that each gen-
tleman in the managing committee had a call of 500 shares,
and wishing to know how many he would take, at the same
time requesting that he would fill up the feral that was at
the back of the letter. He did not answer that letter, nor
take any shares, as he did not consider the concern wor-
thy of any notice. On the 15th of September he had also
received a letter from Mr. Parsons, stating that he had
ridden over the line with Mr. Kenton, the engineer, and
had chosen a very good course of country, and he also
stated that he had persuaded Mr. Rastrick to beceme their
engineer; that on the 17th of September there was a meet-
ing of the directors, and it was then resolved that 300 shares
only should be reserved for each of the directors. He re
membered writing a letter in answer to that, giving au-
thority to put his name down for 100 shares. He after-
wards received several communications from Mr. Parsons,
and one of them, amongst other things, stated that lie was
appointed chairman. He attended a meeting of the committee
for the first time on the 26th. He afterwards learned, en the
Bth of October,. that a letter of allotment for 200 shares had
been placed at the-disposal of Mr. Parsons, for the expenses
and trouble he had incurred in the management of the affairs
of the company. Mr. Parsons, on that occasion, spoke to
him, and told him that he had been refused the letter of allot-
ment, but he had at length prevailed upon' the secretary to
• give it to him. The committee were decidedly of opinion that
the conduct of Mr. Parsons was wrong, as he had no right to
apply for such an allotment as 2,000 shales, as so great a
number required a good deal of consideration, and should
not be given to any but a responsible party. They, there-
fore, deputed him, with Mr. Spooner, M.P., and Mr. Wil-
liams, to ask Mr. Parsons to give up the letter of allotment.
Mr. Parsons, on being asked, fetched the letter, and, after
some hesitation; he gave it up, and it was, with his consent,
destroyed.
A SHAREILOLDICE asked if the shares were then at a dis-
count ?
The CHAIRMAN said that they were not. Since that time
Mr. Parsons had brought an action against several of the
gentlemen on the committee, for having deprived him of the
premium that accrued on the letter, by destroying it.
Mr. Parsons wrote to him to attend as a witness of the
transaction, expressing great regard for him, but at last,
instead of calling him as a witness, he filed a bill in Chancery
against him. After Mr. Parsons had given up the letter et
allotment a report arose that he had been through the Court
of Bankruptcy without having paid any great amount in the
way of dividend. The committee in consequence felt it
necessary to associate some persons of known respectability
with Mr. Parsons in order to assist him. Mr. Parsons ob-
jected at first, but at last consented, and Mess's. Hill and
Heald, solicitors, were appointed. After that time Mr.
Parsons spoke so roughly to the committee that they dotes►
seined that he should not be allowed to act in the committee-
room. Several proceedings with reference to amalgamation
with Mr. Bethel's line and the Andover line, took place sub-
sequently. The attempted amalgamation with Mr. Bethel's
line was prevented by a great difference in the levels at the
point of junction, and the Andover line failed in raising the
required capital. Mr. Parsons bad received 2501. for his
actual expenditure, and four hundred pounds were
offered for his services. •He had refused it, and had
placed the matter in Chancery. His (Mr. Muntz's) object in
calling the shareholders together was to justify himself in
their eyes, and let them know the exact state in which the
Company stood.
The SECRETARY then read the report. At the conclusion
of the reading, Mr. PARSONS lose to justify his conduct, and
a very stormy discussion ensued, which it is unnecessary to
place before the public.
After the recrimination had in some degree subsided,
Mr. Muscrz said that the shareholders were in possession
of the exact state of the Company, and it would be better to
adjourn until the law proceedings came to a close. They
would probably be concluded on Tuesday next.
The meeting then adjourned.

A CONTRAST.—In Nottinghamshire the Duke of
Newcastle thrusts his son out of Parliament (for a time, at least),
and (for a lime only, perhaps), the Duke of Portland thrusts his
son into Parliament. What a " Duke-ridden " county is Notting-
hamshire

LEGACY DUTY.—On Saturday a return obtained by
Mr. Hume was issued of the capital on which legacy duty has been
paid, and amount of revenue received in the United Kingdom for
stamp duties on legacies, &c., in the year ending on the sth of Jan.,
1846. The lion. Member has procured similar returns for several
years. It seems that in the last year the capital on which legacy
duty was paid in Great Britain was 0,599,714/. 3s. 3d. ; the total
amount since 1797 was 1,339,419,5111. 145.11 d. In Ireland the amount
of duty on legacies was 61,6291. 18s. Id. 1 • and on probates and letters
of administration (both in the year 1845), the amount of duty was
65,8521. The revenue received in the year ended on the sth of
January last was, in England and Wales, on legacies, 1,178,866/.65. 9d.;
and on probates, adm.niBtrations, and testamentary inventories,
963,322/. 12s. In Scotland it was respectively 88,073/. 15s. sd. and
66,631/. 10s. ; in Great Brita n, 1,266,9401. 2s. 2d. anc1.1,029,954/. 23. ;
and in Ireland it was 61,62 W. 18s. Id, and 65,852/. The total duty
received since 1797 in the 'United Kingdom on legacies now amounts
to 39,725,4931:-18s. Bd.; and on prohates, &e:; 31,811;896/.
In Ireland the stamps on legacies since 1797 amount to S29,4ein. 4d4
and on Frobsttis Mid atiminiitratitJni to 1,152,70.4,