The New York herald., 1868-04-28

ments would prevent him taking any part In the
Mr.. Thomas wrigley. OF Bury, then read lengthy
paper on the importance OF securing more enective
control over expenditure, with special view to
accurate division OF capital and revenue charges.
He remarked that II was not little extraordinary
that after thirty years had elapsed since the advent Of
business and business principles 1t should be
necessary to discuss a question Of this character.
Inc business OF railway is only question OF re-
ce!pts ana disbursements and their relation TO eacn
other; and compared with the operations OF many Of
our great commercial and manufacturing establish
consideration-viz., the Importance OF securing q
more efiectual control over expenditure-imped
charge Of our affairs. Theoretically, the law ap.
peared to nave made provision for giving 70 tne
sr all s sTe to 70 Be-
gGed - to the raising and donns also the % expsn
sented in due form for their approval or rejection
having first been audited by gentlemen Of their own
did, that the power OF controlling their own affairs
should be vested in the shareholders, 1t had most sig
OF the law, as it stands was to enable the directors
to secure their own election, and to usurp the power
nominay vested in the shareholders The collection
acally organized and regularly practised The faci
ties which directors possessed Of communicating
with the shareholders at the expense Of the company
give to them an fnseparable advantage over the
proprietors, who We're not even allowed to know the
names of their fellow shareholders, except cost
which no individual shareholder would incur In the
London and Northwestern Railway, with
which ne was connected, six OF the drec.
to nominate four out Of six and for any practi.
cal difference in the result they might just
quite competent to understand and to lay down gen.
era principles but they not competent to work
them out nor would it be for their interest that the
directors OF railway should be liable to perpetual
interference IN the management of the under
taking under their charge by an irresponsible
body outside There were certain matters over which
the shareholders ought to exercise an absolute con-
troll and that, too without the necessity OF having
recourse to an organized opposition with all Its con
required to enable the shareholders to exercise their
legitimate influence 1t was clear that there was
essary for the protection of their property was an
easy and e1ectual means OF controlling the expen-
diture and also OF determining the principles and
policy by which the undertaking should be con-
Quoted. Although he should deprecate any attempt
to overawe the directors by means Of permanent
organization, the position in which shareholders
found themselves was so far exceptional as to de-
mand exceptional measures for its correction. He
thought 1t would be far better and tend to better
understanding between directors and prOprletOrs, IT.
instead OF wasting strength in attempting to cope
with the directors, under the law IL now stood,
and at once seek, through Parliament, for such
changes in The law as might be necessary for the
object In view.
Mr.. GALswoR said the great evil at present was
the OF proxies. SO long they existed the share
holders could have no power over the directors ana
must continue at their mercy. Nor could they have
Independent auditors TIL that system abolished.
Mr.. WRIGLEY replied, observing that there was
nothing new In the principle he advocated, but was
that adopted by landowners in the management of
their estates and by manufacturers in that OF their
mills.
The Chairman conveyed the thanks of the COME.
renee to Mr.. Wrigey for his paper, amid applause
Mr. G. III. Parker, OF London, next read paper
ION the desirabeness of enactments restricting any
outlay by directors on capital account until the
requisite funds have been provided, and on the
pediency OF making inquiry before Parliamentary
commit ees into the financial arrangements made by
promoters or new Railways