The Sun.
London, England, 1842-11-10 00:00:00

Current accounts.. £746,158 11 4
Building Societies 1,078 17 3
Lodgment accounts
Assignees and trustees
Suspense accounts
Manchester .. .£690,060 11 0
Bolton ... 19,077 9 0
Newtown
Macclesfield ..
Total liabilities 713,082 9 10
By order of the Board..
G. R. CHAPPELL, Chairman.
From the foregoing it will apirar
that the direct liabilities of the
bank amount to .. .£1,810,462 18 11
While the estimated net assets
amounted to • •

. 1,794,214 11 11

Showing a deficiency of ... 16,248 7 9
Exclusive of the entire capital
And the reserved surplus fund, and
profit for the year, amounting in
the aggregate t 0...

43,6::0 8 9

And making in the whole a total
loss of - . . £800,887 15 9
Mr. J. S. STUBBS then rose, and said that it was
perfectly evident a large sum of money had been 1( st
by the Proprietors, and he thought they had a right
to know how and where it had gone. There were
41,186 shares held by Manchester and Salford people,
and the loss upon them would amount to 410,0001.
His own opinion was, that every Director who had
had anything to do with the bank was bound to sell
every stick and stone of his property to pay the rest
of the Shareholders, as far as possible; for it was
clear that the Shareholders had been robbed: and
swindled out of their property.—(Applause.) As he
said before, it was necessary that they should know
where the money was gone ; and, in the first place, he
should like to know how much had been lost by the
firm of J. H. Heron and Co. ?
The CHAIRMAN said the property which would
come to the bank from the estate of Heron and Co.
was at present in such a state that it was impossible to
answer the question.
Mr. STUBBS—That is what I expected. Perhaps
you will tell me what is the loss by Raleigh and Co.?
The CHAIRMAN—In the present state of affairs it
would be quite impossible to answer that question.
Mr. STUBBS—Perhaps you will tell me what loss
will be incurred by Burdekin's absconding? I see,
by a paper published on Saturday, that he is the owner
of upwards of 1,400 shares.
The CHAIRMAN—The defalcations of Mr. Burdekin
will be more than made up by the securities.
Mr. STUBBS—YOU will, perhaps, answer me the
question whether he has gone away with the cogni-
sance of the Board?
The CHAIRMAN—He has not • gone away with my
cognisance.
Mr. STUBBS—Perhaps you will tell me whether any
arrangement has been made between the bank and the
celebrated Richard Roberts ?
The CHAIRMAN—There has not.
Mr. GREIG observed that there was no motion
before the meeting, but he thought the steps he was
now taking would bring a motion before the meeting.
He endeavoured at the last meeting to prove certain
charge.; which he brought against the Managing
Directors, but he had not been able to elicit the in-
formation needed in consequence of one individual not
being present. The individual to whom he alluded was
now present, and he trusted that the Chairman would see
the necessity of allowing the resolution for dissolving
the meeting to remain in abeyance until that gentle-
man came forward and gave the explanations which,
as Shareholders, they were entitled to receive, and
which they must receive before they entertained such
a question as the dissolution of the Company. He had
brought some distinct charges against Mr. Roberts,
which he would repeat in his presence, and to which
he expected that individual would return due and
faithful answers.—(Applause.) He was aware that
an attempt might be made to throw all the blame upon
the unfortunate man (Burdekin) who had absconded,
but, utterly worthless as he thought him, still he
thought he was unable'to have carried on successfully
so complicated a system of villany as had been carried
on. He should now charge Mr. Roberts with having,
first of all, abused the trust and confidence reposed in
him as a Director; secondly, with having abused the
trust reposed in him as one of the Managing Com-
mittee ; thirdly, with having deceived the Sharehold-
ers and the public ; and fourthly, he should charge
him with fraudulently abstracting money from the Bank
for his own private uses. lie charged him with these
acts, and asked him to stand up before the meeting
and disprove them.—(Applause.)
Mr. ATILLINGTON impressed upon the Shareholders
the necessity of thoroughly investigating the accounts
before they gave their sanction to the dissolution (~f
the Company. Before they passed such a resolution
he hoped they would take care to well understand
whether or not they should be placed in a worse situ-
ation by so doing.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. GREW proposed that Richard Roberts shou7d
be heard, observing that if he did not come for-
ward and answer the charges he had brought against
him, he (Mr. Greig) should submit a resolution against
the dissolution of the Company.
The CHAIRMAN said the object in ca"ling the mee!-
ngtogether was to inquire whether
th it was the wish of
y one Shareholder to propose e dissolution of tl e
Company.
Mr. CURTIS (of the firm of Parr, Curtis, and Co.)
rose to propose the dissolution of the Company, and
argued that there were three parties to blame for
bringing the bank into its preSent state. lie consi-
dered that the Shareholders themselves had not ac-
quitted themselves as they ought to have done, in
having received the statements of the Directors at
each succeeding halfLyearly meeting without inquir-
ing into the particulars upon which those statements
were founded, and therefore the Shareholders them-
selves ought to come forward and hear a portion of the
blame which jointly attached to them.
After some further remarks from Mr. Curtis,
Mr. GREIG referred to the 74th clause of the deed
of settlement, and said, so far as he could understand
the words, it was not necessary in order to the disso-
lution of the Company that there should be either a
mover or seconder. If it required a resolution at all,
he should move an amendment that it be not enter-
tained at all till thebusiness of the bank was explained.
Mr. E. Itoizaws afterwards read long defence of