The New York herald., 1877-02-08

iction. He stated that for tho amendments
there there % were .:.s, 2ss ro'ers rsprcscn,ing s,sss
voters1 representing 2,494 votes, being a majority
against tho amendment OF ~ votes The total
tho amendment was 3i5, includins os
having no votes tho shares represented numbering
1888. The total number OF shareholders voting
against the amendment, including 80 having
no votes, was l20, representing 81 1S2 shares Objcc
votes for shr ancndrncnt increasing tho apuarcn, ma
jorty against the amendment TO C7 votes
lie then stated that two letters had been received
from Mr. Loefer us 10 the voting and that that
gentlcmnn's objections 'slmply absurd"
The secretary. at the request OF the chairman next
read the letters, In which in brief Mr Locnicr re-
questcd that The voting eh be counted In rdancc
with the provisions IN the articles Of association.
QUESTION or JURISDICTION
Tho chairman, before announcing the state of the
poll, said was Tor him. not Mr. Birt 10 determine the
value OF the objection IN Mr.. Loefcrs letters. The
objection raised by Mr. Brit on behalf OF Mr.
Pendcr against tweniyscvcn was on the ground
that the voters wore corporations and that their
proxies wore not under tbor common seals. Tho
provisions OF the articles OF tho association however
applied 10 corporations which had common scals but
the voters In question were sociSfes auon,nues who
did not usually have seals. He should therefore
accept the twenty-scven votes. tIicar. hear AS
to Mr. Ioealer. letters no thought they were
cation sahi, mo member holding less than ten
shares shall nave any vote. Every member holding
every complete number Of shares with this limit that
shareholder shall be entitled 10 moro than 100
IRON being ovcrriddcn Instead therefore OF allow
ing the Globe Company l49 votes he should allow
them only 100. he should allow 100 votes 10 the
Banque Centrsc, who claimed 800 votes and he should
rule out 400 votes In behalf OF Mcssrs Morris Puckc
This reduced the number OF votes against Mr.. Bram-
VOLTS amendment by 64o leaving the humber OF
against 9i5, and giving majority IN invor OF
the amendment o! 500 votes He then declared tho
amendment carried, the announcement beng received
with cheers and Kisses and followed by great uproar.
MR.. BiRT AGAIN PROTESTS.
Mr.. Brit protested against the chairman assuming
10 n hp III ~ t,f
Mr. Cnderdown protested against tho course followed
by the chairman. Mr. LaOouchere urged that tho
matter should be left In tho hands OF tho chairman,
whose views, he said, nothing would alter. Mr..
Pncklc asked whether tho Chairman had looked into
the shares OF Messrs Smens as he had into those OF
hts partner and himself The chairman, In reply said
what applied 10 one firm applied TO tho other Mr.. J.
aud entirely wrong. He thought It much better TO
havc an nmicabe conference In tho matter dispute
The votes had better bc allowed to stand they APP
pearcd In the scrntnecrs report and let them appoint
u committee. (''No noi'1
Tho chairman said no could not depart from hts dc.
cison.
Mr. Ponder, who protested against tho decision OF
the chairman claimed that tho indng legally IN
favor OF his party said no should proceed 10 put
forward the names Of tho committee thoy wished 10
appoint
ADJOURNMENT PROPOSED AS REMEDY
The chairman, however declined 10 receive the
names or to allow thcm 10 DO put, but they desired
to adjourn tho meeting TIL OF law had decided
the matter, Il might be adjourned for three months.
Mr.. Iaboucncrc then moved, and Mr. Hancock. VINO
protested against tho action OF tho Globe Company,
seconded resolution adjourning the meeting for
Mr. Undcrdowu objected TO the adjournment because
m tho meantime tho directors would might proceed
with the policy which they had hitherto pursued
Mr. Ford. who spoke against the resolution at con.
siderable length said the Direct hoard had promised
them 10 act mpartally tho matters brought under
their notice, but their conduct had been quito
verse. He then detailed the chief crimes of which no
thought had been guilty. making accusations right
and cit and upholding h functions and Character of
the Giobc Telegraph Company. It was not, lie said 70
be lampooncd out OF existence with It's f3 600 OF
capital
Tho Chairman SAID he had given his decision, and It
was not his proposition that the meeting should be
'.wAsrs TO KNOW. voc KNOW"
ME isabouche'e said the Globe Company held about
COO OF Anglo.American stock, large amount IN
the Telegraph Construction and Maintenance Com.
puny and comparatively small amount IN the Direct
Company, aud were they the people to whom the fu-
turc oil tho company should be entrusted or ought
they 10 conano the control OF the company Mcssrs
Morris and Puckc, stockholders in what was cal ed
tho Anglo American market. After few further
observations hc withdrew his motion Tor an adjourn
mcnI Mr. Ponder then submitted another resolution
nstructiny tho directors not TO exercise the powers
contained In section article CO. OF tho articles of
association, or any other powers conferred them
by the articles 10 mako contracts with other compa-
MOS or agreements as TO Tho transmission OF tcle-
grams for moro than twelve months without consult
ing tho shareholders at special meeting. Mr.. Ford
seconded thc resolution. Mr.. Laboucherc opposed tho
motion. lie did believe tho restrictions now do.
sired 10 bc imposed the Board existed In the East.
srn Telegraph Company, of which Mt. Penocr Is chair.
man. or IN the AnglO-American Telegraph Company.
Tho chairman, replying to ono OF Mr. Ford's state
ments, asserted that the independents shareholders
were entirely IN favor OF Mr.. BramwelIs aImcndmcnt
with regard to Mr. Pender's resolution They woul
always take the shareholders opinion any matters
where they thought would DO TO the interest OF tho
company 10 do so, but they could not carry on tho
company with such restrictions as Mr. Psndor sug.
gcslcd-
The resolution then put TO the meeting and lost
on which M. Fender demanded poll lie was sure
that "rght might" and that right would conquer
In tho present case.
Mr.. Labouchers-In fact we arc 10 DO buIl,ed n we
caSno; be jocxcycd out % ., our property taushterl
30 of tho Articles OF ASSOCIATION by striking tho
following words:-
resolution wh,sever approved the Board Of
sareho'der at that meeting. unless lie shall
.eerv,ary o The notice u writing D: b.
s S ."e c 1 c @ s hc
RESOLUTION or resolutions he proposes and written
memorandum In his sinc and address.
Mr. Ford In scconding the motion, said that the
directors had seven days 10 call a meeting; but as
shareholders mus, give ten days notice any resolu
ton which they proposed 10 move ut tho meeting tho
the thing was simply impracticablc.
Mcssrs. smith aud Labouchcre spoke against tho
The Chairman said that when tho motion wns Arst
brought before them by Mr. Ponder they admitted
that article 80 was incops'scnt with article 49, but
they snid they would make proposition at the next
ordinary meeting dealing with the qucsto on and that
meantime they would give fourteen days notice OF
lie then pa, the resolution. which was also lost
MI Birt then announced the result OF tho poll de-
msndcd on M fcndcrs rcs0tuttOn as follows: For,
ASS votes; against, 2439; majority Tor 40 votes
subject 10 the ssmc objections US on tho poll Sir.
BramweIi's amendment
The chsirmsu. IN declaring tho result said the samo
OBJECTIONS applied In the other Case, that being
there was majority against Mr. Pcndcrs resolution
Of 6On
Alter some discussion was decided TO adjourn tho
meeting unt March O. aud tho proceedings which had
latscd nearly three hours, then terminated
MEXICO.