The Sun.
London, England, 1851-03-10 00:00:00

851.

[PRICE SD,

should bo a distinct recognition that that completion
was satisfactory to the Eastern Counties Company, in
order that no question upon that head may arise after-
wards.

Mr. SULTZER.—The explanation with respect to the
deed is not quite clear to my mind, and therefore you will
excuse me for asking another Tiestion. I consider that
the interests of the shareholders under the two Acts of
Parliament are not identical. The original shareholders
are entitled under their agreement to 4 per cent. and a
participation in the surplus profits, but under the second
Act of Parliament the 6 per cent. shareholders are not
entitled to any surplus profits; and a time will come
when there will be a difference of opinion as to the
division that may be made, and as to the propor-
tion of the revenue to be apportioned to the pay-
ment of the dividend. Therefore, I should like to know
whether in the deed proposed to be executed, by which
these works will be handed over to the Eastern Coun-
ties Company when completed, any provision is inserted
which shall confirm and secure the original 4 per cent.
shareholders that participation in the surplus profits to
which they are entitled. It has been said, with respect
to the surplus profits, the shareholders are all on an equa-
lity, although one class receives 4 per cent, and the other
6; but that is a position which the original shareholders,
for whom I appear, deny. We still maintain our right
to the surplus profits after the payment of the 4 per cent.
dividend.—(Hear, hear.) lam glad to learn from the
statement you have made, that we aro gradually ap-
proaching a position of greater prosperity.; and this
tact was a further reason why they should not surrender
a right which they had obtained before the second Act
creating the 6 per cent. capital was obtained. I wish
therefore to know whether in the deed or any agree-
ment for amalgamation to which reference had been
made our interests will be projected.
Mr. PARKER—The answer which; I have le-gift-18"
the Honourable Proprietor is, that those rights, if they
existed, are untouched by the deed and plan of amal-
gamation. The rights of all the shareholders are left
exactly as they are secured by the Acts of Parliament.
Mr. Sultzer is mistaken, however, if he supposes that
as soon as this line yields any return beyond four per
cent. on the first 120,0001. of the borrowed money, and
before the six per cent. shareholders receive their per
centage, he will be entitled to any surplus profits. He
will find, when the proper time comes, what the law on
the subject is, if he is willing to litigate the point. I
can only repeat that these rights are completely patent,
and will not in any way be affected by this deed, which is
only a simple declaration of the works having been com-
pleted, so as to convey to the Norfolk Company the rights
to which they are entitled.
The CHAIRMAN—I wish to state, that if Mr. Sultz2r,
or any other proprietor, would wish to see a copy of the
deed before it is executed, I pledge my word that it
shall be sent to bim.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Pro-
prietor may take it for granted that in this agreement
or deed of amalgamation none of the rights of the share-
holders will be touched, and should the question to
which he has referred arise, he shall not be precluded by
any act of ours from litigating it.
Mr. CORY—Does Mr. Parker consider that the six
per cent. shareholders are entitled to surplus profits?
Mr. PARKER—No; they are not entitled to any sur-
plus profits.
Mr. SULTZER—No; according to what Mr. Parker
states, the six per cent. shareholders will swamp our
surplus profits. _

The CHAIRMAN thought that the pledge he had given
ought to satisfy the original shareholders that their rights
would be fully protected.

Mr. Suurzia thought that the very decisive opinion
that had been given by Mr. Parker with respect to the
rights of the parties whom he (Mr. Sultzer) repre-
sented, rendered it necessary that he should propose a
resolution upon this subject. He then proposed that
in the agreement for the proposed amalgamation of the
Eastern Counties Lines, and in the Act to be obtained
therefor, a clause be inserted protecting the interests
of the four per cent. shareholders, and guaranteeing to
them the half surplus profits to which they are entitled
under the Lowestoft Railway and Harbour Acts.
Mr. CORY seconded the resolution.

Mr. PARKER said that the resolution in itself appeared
a very harmless one, inasmuch as there was no in-
tention to interfere in anyway with the rights or in-
terests of the four per cent. shareholders; but the effect
of such a resolution, if passed, would be to clog
the hands of the directors, who were bound to protect
the interests of the proprietors. Nothing, he said,
could be done which would affect the interests of the
shareholders without an Act of Parliament, and when
that would have to be brought before them, they would
have an opportunity of being heard. If the directors
should refuse to insert a clause in such a Bill, then, ac-
cording to the standing orders of the House of
Lords, the shareholders might oppose it in Com-
mittee.

Mr. SULTZER thought, from the remarks with which
Mr. Parker commenced, that ho would not have ob-
jeoted to this-resolution. - 4 ,
Mr. PARKER said it was perfectly clear the resolution,
as it stood, was a harmless one, but then Mr. Sultzer's
opinion with respect to the surplus profits and that of
the directors were different, and the latter were anxious
that nothing should appear on the minutes that could be
construed as inimical to the carrying out of the agree-
ment into which they bad entered.
Mr. CORY said that, as holders of four per cent. stock,
they were anxious to express their views, in order that
the directors might have them before them.
The CnAIr.xAN pledged himself to Mr. Sultzer that be
would be no party to an amalgamation affecting the
interests of the shareholders without having first sub-
mitted both to Mr.- Sultzer and Mr. Cory a copy of the
draft of any agreement that might be proposed. He
would also send a copy of the deed which had been re-
ferred to the day after he saw it himself, and before it
was executed.

Mr. J. O. TAYLOR thought that Mr. Sultzer would see
that he had now done sufficient in this matter. The ob-
ject which Mr. Sultzer had in view was to protect the
interests of the four per cent., but after the pledge that
had been given by the chairman, it was perfectly clear
that neither the rights of the four per cent. nor the six
per cent. would be in any way interfered with without
an Act of Parliament; and therefore he put it to Mr.
Sultzer whether after this he would press his resolution.
Mr. NORTON, as a holder of four per cent. stock, did
not think it was necessary to press the resolution.
Mr. SULTZER, after the explanation and pledge given
by the Chairman, expressed himself satisfied, and with
the concurrence of Mr. Cory, withdrew his resolution.
, Captain ANDREWS then made the following statement:
—Referring to the printed report of revenue account
now befere you, it is gratifying to find that the expec-
tation which I expressed at our last half-yearly meet-
ing, of the steady increase of our trade and re-
venue, has been fully realized. The present account
for the half-year ending January 4th, 1851,
shows the total receipts for harbour dues to be
3,1891. 17s. 10d. This is exclusive of rents on buildings
and lands, and other sources of revenue, showing an in-
crease over the corresponding half-year of 7391. Is. 7d.
The total receipts for the past year for harbour
dues are 6,038/. 9s. I Id. against 4,4581. 17s. Id.
for 1849, showing an increase of revenue for the
year 1850 over 1849 of 1,5791. 12s. 10d. or 35 per cent.
This increase of revenue has been derived 'principally
by greater imports, the exports having remained nearly
stationary. In 1849 the import of coal was 47,185 tons,
and the export of corn 41,267 quarters. In 1850 the
import of coal has been 72,080 tons, and the export of
corn 40,821 quarters, showing an increased importation
of 24,895 tons, or 50 per cent. and a decreased ex-
portation of 446 quarters only, or 1 per cent. The
increased arrivals and tonnage have been equally great.
In the year 1849 the total number of vessels that en-
tered the harbour was 1,168 of the registered tonnage
of 69,486 tons; in 1850 the total number of vessels has
been 1,575, ad the registered tonnage 108,238, showing
an increase in the number of vessels of 407, or 34 per cent.
and an increased tonnage of 38,752, or 5512 per cent.
Whilst this great increase has taken place in the trade
and revenue of the harbour, it is gratifying to find that
the working expenses have not increased in like pro-
portion. The corresponding half-year of 1848 showed
the harbour receipts to be 2,1531. 17s. Bd. and the work-
ing expenses 1,1581. 25.; the past half-year shows
the receipts to be 3,189/. 17s. 10d. and the work-
ing expenses 1,4351. 105. 11d., giving an increase of 48.
per cent. upon the receipts, and only 19 per cent. on the
working expenses; and there is no doubt that a
still greater increase of revenue will be at-
tended with a smaller increase of working ex-
penses. That the trade will steadily improve, there
can he no doubt. Increased facilities, by the erection of
warehouses, no w in the course of completion, will add ma-
terially thereto. The establishment of merchants and
ship owners in the port will improve the export as well
as the import trade; and as the harbour becomes better
known, it will be still more frequented as a
harbour of refuge, for which purpose its equal
does not exist upon the eastern cos3t of England.
Although the past year has been unubnally mild
and free from storms, 447 sail have entered for refuge
only; of these 91 ware damaged or disabled, many of
them of large tonnage, such as had never been seen in
this port before, all of which received effectual shelter and
assistance here. These are cheering prospects, but in
the opinion but the shadow of the increase that is to fol-
low. There are sources of trade and profit at present
latent, but which require only the teach of enterprise to
draw forth; not the least among these are our
fisheries. For ages back history records how eminently
Lowestoft has been a fishing town. Why is it not SO
now? Why has our fishery decreased? and why can it
no longer be profitably carried on? Has the formation
of the harbour, connected by a railway to the first mar-
ket in the world, destroy ea the fishery ? Certainly
not ; but it has altered in: character, and it required
corresponding alteration and imprcvement in working
tho trade to render it still a source of profit. The
introduction of the railway eyatem in this country, gave
facilities to more distant ports to send the produce of
their fisheries to the London market. From this period
may be traced the decline of the fishery iu Lowestoft;
in 1839, eighty-four boats, employing about 840 men
and boys, besides numerous people on shore, were
employed in the herring fishery for that year;
their catch was 1,572 lasts, or 15,730,000
fish. Ten years later, in 1849, only thirty-six
boats, employing 360 men, wore engaged in the herring
fishery; they caught 959 lasts, or 9,590,000 fish. Here
was a falling off of more than one-half the number of