Billeder på siden

to at least 201. per month, and to 30s. that, therefore, there was no ground for per week for the assistance of his son; the action,' and non-suited your Petitioner. and that the 58. per share was not paid “ That your Petitioner being advised to your Petitioner as a reward for his that a case was fully made out to go to services as Secretary to the Company, the jury, and that if it had gone to them, but as the remuneration stipulated for a verdict must, according to the evidence,

, him, as Patentee, for granting to the have been recorded for him, moved the Company the use of his patent; that Court of King's Bench, on the 13th inst., Wm. Baker, esq. (your Petitioner's at- for a rule to show cause why the verdict torney in this action), who is Clerk to the should not be set aside, and a new trial Trustees of the Commercial-road, proved had, upon the ground that a case was fully that your Petitioner, as Secretary to the made out to go to the Jury. Company, had frequent interviews with “That on this occasion his Lordship him and the said Trustees upon the sub- said, 'In this case, as for Company, there ject of laying down stones, upon the was none; but those persons had assumed Company's plan, on the Commercial- to themselves the title of The National road; that at length terms were agreed Stone Way Company; it appeared to him upon; that he drew out an agreement, that the plaintiff had no claim; this was a and sent it to your Petitioner for the ap- scheme of the plaintiff's own, set on foot probation of the Committee; that it was for his own benefit, in order that he might returned to him by the Solicitor to the have his Patent adopted. There was no Company, as having been approved of by ground for saying that the defendant had him on behalf of the Committee; that he employed the plaintiff, and upon that (the witness) had himself been Secretary ground the plaintiff was nonsuited. He to a similar Company for five months, saw no ground for setting aside that nonwhile forming (another Gentleman having suit ;' and the rule was refused. acted as Solicitor), and that for such “ That your Petitioner begs humbly to services he had been paid 2501., besides submit to your Honourable House the 501. for expenses ; that Mr. Nathaniel Resolutions passed at the Public Meeting Bliss proved that in January last, your in 1825-the account opened at the Petitioner paid him 8l. 108. for printing Bankers' under the title of the National the Prospectus of the Company.

Stone Way Company, and the two pay“That the defence to the action was, ments made to your Petitioner--the one that no Company had ever been formed; for the grant of his Patent for the use of that, if one had been formed, it was your the Company, and the other for his Petitioner's own Company; that the Com- travelling expenses on the voyages and mittee might, with the same propriety, sue journey which he was instructed to underyour Petitioner for their services as he them take on the Company's account, are proof for his; that the Company was set up for of the existence of the Company; and the plaintiff's own benefit"; that there was that, therefore, the Lord Chief Justice, no evidence that your Petitioner had been with all due submission, had not the employed by the defendant; and that the slightest ground, either in law or equity, plaintiff had been paid 58. per Sharo, for for saying that, " in this case, as for Comacting as Secretary to the Company. pany, there was none.'

“ That the Lord Chief Justice said, “ That to be nonsuited by the Recorder, 'that no Company had ever been formed; because there was a Company, and because that the plaintiff undertook the journeys the Company, and not the Committee of (the expense of which had been paid to the Company ought to have been sued; him in two respective sums of 201. and 51.) and to undergo the same ruinous process to promote their joint object; that he by the Lord Chief Justice, because there acknowledged the wisdom of the defend- was no Company, exhibits such an instance ant's Counsel's observation; that the of discordancy in legal decisions, as is, Committee might, with the same pro- your Petitioner hopes, for the honour of priety, sue the plaintiff for their services the country, without a parallel ; and as he them for his ; that the plaintiff had which, besides involving the unfortunate been paid 5s. per share for acting as victim of such discordant opinions in utter Secretary to the Company; and that there ruin, must tend, unless a remedy be apwas nothing to show that your Petitioner plied to the evil, to bring our Courts of had been employed by the defendant, and Judicature into derision and contempt.

“ That your Petitioner is wholly at a further assertion of his Lordship, that the loss to conceive what motive could have Committee might with equal propriety sue induced the Learned Chief Justice to the plaintiff for their services as he them assert that there was no Company, unless for his, there not having been a tittle of it were to extricate the defendant from evidence adduced, as above stated, to the situation in which he was placed by show that your Petitioner was a Partner ; not having pleaded in abatement; for whereas, all the evidence clearly demoncertainly, had the Company described in strated that he was only a servant of the the declaration in the proceedings never Company, and never could have particiexisted, no plea in abatement could have pated in its profits. been made; and, as the defendant could “ That the third assertion of the Learnnot be the National Stone Way Company, ed Judge, ‘that your Petitioner had been the plaintiff who declared against him as paid 5s. per share for acting as Secretary such must necessarily be nonsuited. to the Company,' cannot be spoken of but

“That his Lordship, notwithstanding with the utmost astonishment; for not only his twice-repeated assertion to the contrary, is such assertion diametrically opposed to did, to all intents and purposes, as your the evidence which the prospectus and the Petitioner humbly submits, admit the printed resolutions furnished at the trial, existence of the Company, inasmuch as it being expressly stated in these docu

, one of the grounds assigned for the non- ments that this 5s. per share was to be suit was, that your Petitioner had been paid to your Petitioner as Patentee, but paid 5s. per Share for acting as Secretary to that given by Mr. Price, who swore to the Company.

most positively that this payment was not “That the Lord Chancellor has decided made to your Petitioner for his services as that all unchartered Companies are nothing Secretary, but for granting the use of his more than common partnerships, and that Patent to the Company—the amount of every Shareholder or Partner in them may which, your Petitioner craves permission be sued individually for every claim on to add, was scarcely sufficient to pay for the Company.

the Patent. “That the City Court of Requests, “ That the fourth assertion of his Lordgrounding their judgment expressly on ship, that there was nothing to show that such decision of the Lord Chancellor, your Petitioner had been employed by the lately condemned Mr. A. K. Hutchison, defendant, was equally opposed to the Solicitor to, and a Shareholder in, this evidence; for the Minute-book proved, very Company, to pay 41. 15s. for the that the defendant attended and voted in engraving which forms part of the Com- the Committee; and Mr. Price proved pany's Prospectus.

that on the occasion in question your That, consequently, the decision of Petitioner acted as Secretary, and that it the Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench was the defendant himself who moved that is not only at variance with that of the your Petitioner, the Secretary, should Learned Recorder, as already demonstrated, call another Meeting when to him should but directly opposed to the highest Legal seem fit;' so that, by this act, it was inAuthority in the Realm.

contestably brought home to the defend“ That the assertion of the Lord Chief ant that he had personally employed your Justice, that your Petitioner undertook the Petitioner, and as incontestably established voyages and journeys above described to that he identified himself with the other promote the joint object of himself and members of the Committee as the employthe Company, was not only unsupported ers of your said Petitioner ; but had the by any proof that your Petitioner was a defendant not made the motion in question, Partner in the Company, the reverse being nor even been a member of the Committee, the fact, but was in direct opposition to it is contended, with all due deference, the evidence of the Company's Minute- that he was, as a Shareholder, one of your Book, and the testimony of Mr. Price, Petitioner's employers ; for the Committee who distinctly proved that the Committee were appointed by the Shareholders, or instructed your Petitioner to undertake Company, to conduct their concerns ; and the said voyages and journeys on the it was abundantly proved in evidence, that Company's account, and at the Company's the Committee had employed your Petispense.

tioner, by instructing, commanding, and That equally unaccountable is a directing him to do what to them seemed



best calculated to promote the interests of assumed to themselves the title of the the Company of which they were the National Stone Way Company,' and make guardians.

the assumption of this, or any other title, “ That your Petitioner cannot possibly a ground for the nonsuit, inasmuch as understand, even had he failed in esta- there is no law to prevent a number of blishing his claim on the defendant for his persons from trading together under any services as Secretary to the Company, style or title they may think proper to how such failure could be a bar to his use; and as persons assuming similar other claims, viz. those for his son's titles have been, and may be, sued both at services, and for the 81. 10s. for printing law and in equity. the prospectus; nor, consequently, how “ That your Petitioner, with equal dethe Chief Justice could declare that there ference, contends that his Lordship altowas no ground for this action; for your gether overstepped his duty, by declaring, Petitioner humbly contends, that if the without any qualification, in the face of action had been brought for this 81. 10s. your Petitioner's acknowledged care of the only, the said sum having never been paid Company's funds, and in the absence of to him, a verdict must have been recorded all evidence of there having ever been enin his favour, unless the doctrine laid down tertained the slightest suspicion, or of any by the Lord Chancellor, before alluded to, insinuation even having ever been thrown and the common law of the land, regard- out, that he sought to benefit himself at ing partnerships, could have been shown the Company's expense, that this was a to be at variance with some written scheme set on foot for the plaintiff's own Statute. Indeed, upon the principle upon benefit, in order to get his patent adopted; which the Committee had paid your for it was proved that his patent, by a Petitioner the two sums of 201. and 51. solemn contract entered into between him respectively, on account of his travelling and the Company, was adopted before the expenses to Jersey, Guernsey, and Devon- Company began their operations; and shire, on account of the Company, he therefore all his subsequent services as humbly submits that he ought to have been Secretary could not have been given in paid all other expenses incurred on the order to get his patent adopted.' Your same account also ; and that, therefore, Petitioner therefore humbly submits, that, his claim for the 81. 10s. furnished, of as invention is property, he had a right to itself, a case to go to the Jury.

make this contract, without being liable That, aside from the above considera- in any action that might arise on a matter tions, as the declaration in the proceed- unconnected with it, to be non-suited on ings sets forth that your Petitioner's claims the ground that he had exercised this unwere touching the National Stone Way questionable right. But if his lordship Company, of which the defendant was a meant to say, as it is to be presumed he Manager and a Shareholder, your Peti-did, that because your Petitioner had extioner, with all due deference, further con- ercised this right, and got his patent tends that the Learned Judge had no adopted, he had no claim for his services right, as the defendant had not availed as Secretary, he most humbly begs to rehimself of his privilege of pleading in present to your Honourable House, in the abatement, to require any proof that the strongest light, the extreme injustice of defendant had, individually, employed such a conclusion ; for it may be asked, your Petitioner; and that in the face of under what obligation could your Petithe evidence of the existence of the Com- tioner be, to become the servant of the pany, of the Committee having been ap- Company cither during the time of his pointed to conduct the Company's con- natural life, or for a shorter period, becerns, and of the Committee having been, cause he had granted them for a defined as the representatives of the Company, equivalent the use of a certain property of your Petitioner's employers, the case, upon which he was possessed, unless it could be all his claims, ought to have gone to the shown, which was not even attempted to Jury.

be done, that with his property he had “ That your Petitioner, with the utmost sold his services too for the sum of deference to your Honourable House, 1441. ? states, that he can see no ground on “ And that your Petitioner begs, lastly, which the Lord Chief Justice could jus- humbly to submit to your Honourable tify his assertion, that these persons had | House, that whilst the City Court of Re


quests, founding their judgment upon the knowing from public report that the hon. Lord Chancellor's decision, as above stated, gentleman had been connected and mixed compelled one of the Shareholders in this up with several contpanies of a questionCompany to pay for the engraving which able nature, he thought an inquiry ought forms part of the Prospectus, the Lord to take place previously to his re-appointChief Justice of the King's Bench exempts ment to his office. But his views did not another Shareholder in the same Company rest here. He looked higher : he wished from paying the printing, which forms the to have the whole question of Joint-stock other part of the same Prospectus. companies inquired into, both as they re

Your Petitioner, therefore, humbly garded the interests of the public, and the prays your Honourable House to take his interests, and honour, and character of case into your consideration, and to afford that House. It was with this view, and him that relief which will save him from with this view only, that he meant to the ruin in which the nonsuit above de- bring the general question under the conscribed has involved him; and to be per- sideration of the House. mitted to prove, at the bar of your


In looking to the circumstances which able House, either by himself or by Coun- had taken place within the last two years, sel, the allegations set forth in this Peti- it was impossible, even for the most cleartion. And your Petitioner, as in duty sighted persons, to form more than an bound, will ever pray."

imperfect idea of what had been done ; Ordered to lie on the table.

indeed, many honourable members were,

up to that moment, ignorant of the exJoint Stock COMPANIES-ARIGNA tent and variety of the transactions, with MINING COMPANY -- Mr. Brogden.] respect to Joint-stock companies, which Mr. Alderman Waithman said, he laboured had taken place within that period. Genunder considerable difficulty in bringing tlemen who resided for the most part of forward the motion, of which he had given the year in the country, and young memnotice for that evening. If he had to bers who had not turned their minds to bring forward a motion upon which the subject, would be surprised to learn, honourable gentlemen present could feel that, in the course of the last two or three no observations personal to themselves, years, no less than six hundred Jointhe should feel no such difficulty; but he stock companies had been set on foot, felt it impossible to enter upon this sub- requiring a capital of 300,000,0001, and ject without making allusions and remarks upwards, to carry them into effect. Now, which must not only be felt by honourable he spoke rather confidently upon this submembers themselves, but also create a ject, as he was not without authority for considerable sensation in the minds of his assertions. The House must be aware, their friends. He wished it, however, to that an inquiry, such as that into which be understood, in the outset, that in the he had been obliged to enter, could not observations which he should feel it his have been made without much labour, in duty to make, it was not his intention to order to find out the different companies, confine himself to one individual, or any the directors, and managers of them; number of individuals. And here he their various objects, the deposits paid begged to set himself right in the opi- upon them, the premiums to which they nion of the House, with respect to an hon. had severally risen ; their present value, gentleman opposite, as he felt that he had &c. &c. But it was impossible that he not been fairly dealt with in being called could have gone through such an inquiry upon to come forward with a specific without aid. He had received much ascharge against that hon. gentleman (Mr. sistance; and he trusted that the facts Brogden). Indeed, he felt that, upon a obtained were in such a state of forwardsubject of such magnitude, it would be ness as to be in a short time laid before invidious to bring a direct charge against the public. When he stated that six any particular member of that House. hundred Joint-stock companies had come The only reason why he alluded more out within a certain period, he wished it especially to the hon. gentleman was, to be understood, that many of them because he had, for some tiine, held an vanished almost immediately ; not, howimportant office in the appointment of ever, before some money had been obtainthat House, and because he was again to ed for the shares in very many instances ; be proposed to fill it. Feeling this, and and in those cases the parties suffering

[ocr errors]

could obtain no redress, because the of shares were the losers. This was not transactions were in themselves illegal. the fact. On the contrary, it not unfreBut there were now before the public quently happened, that persons sold when more than three hundred Joint-stock com- shares were at a great premium—in one panies of various kinds, of which thirty instance, 1,2001. or 1,4001.--and bought were engaged, or to be engaged, in British in again when they had reached their or Foreign mining; these thirty alone greatest depression, perhaps 401. or 501.; taking a capital of 25,000,0001. to carry and in this way they were, in many inthem into effect. This was enough to stances, the present holders.

In some show the House the immense sums which cases, too, where persons had paid so had been abstracted from circulation, and much as 14,0001. they were cut off from which, he ventured to assert, had contri- being shareholders, in consequence of not buted more to the severe pressure of dis- having paid the third deposit; and in tress which they had all felt, than the addition to this there had been a loss of corn-laws, the currency, or any other cir- 30,0001. in the shape of premiums. cumstance to which that distress had been “ True," said certain persons;

is but it is ascribed. It was throughout a system of of little consequence, as the money taken delusion and fraud, practised upon the out of the pockets of one set of speculaweak and credulous, by the artful and tors has found its way into the pockets of designing. In mining alone (he spoke in another set; and so, as a national matter, round numbers, and only upon a calcula- there is no loss.” But, if he understood tion made three weeks since), there were, any thing of government, it was the duty as he had already stated, thirty companies of the legislature to protect the foolish requiring a capital of 25,000,0001., and and the simple, the silly and the ignorant, upon which payments to the amount of against the arts and insidious devices of 5,200,0001. had been already made. Ad- the crafty and the knavish. He had one ding to this a rough average of the pre- further observation to make before he left miums on shares, which he would take at this part of the subject. Supposing an 9,000,0001., it would make a total of average were struck of the twelve mil14,200,0001. Now, the present value of lions-supposing it were taken at only these shares (if, indeed, they could at all half that amount—it was to be recollectbe sold) was 2,400,0001.; so that, in the ed, that the work of gambling was going event of such a sale, there would be a on every day and hour. Sometimes clear loss to the public of 12,000,0001. or shares rose rapidly, and fell as suddenly, thereabouts. The House would from this in the course of twenty-four hours ; so form some idea of what the total loss to that the system was carried to an enorthe public must be. It might be said, mous and incalculable extent, spreading that this money was not all lost by one over four, five, or six millions of money. description of people, and that all the He had left out of his calculation, perhaps shares had not been sold. But there was two or three hundred other Joint-stock the mischief of which he complained. companies, probably of a worse descripSome of the shares had been kept back, tion, but, separately, not of much magnion purpose to give a fictitious value to the tude or importance. His object was, to others. It was in this that the trickery examine the injury the system had proof the transactions consisted. If a man duced ; and he called upon the House to bought a lottery ticket, and wished to enter upon an inquiry into the nature and gamble in that way, he knew what he was origin of the companies, as a part of its about. He felt that he was risking 20s. public duty. If no satisfaction could be for about 10s., and that a part of the afforded for the injury already sustained, money so lost would go to government; it was time, at least, to look round upon but here was gambling of the very worst the distressing scene, and to consider of description--gambling, where a man must some measure of security and protection lose without the chance of gaining. It for the future. might be said, that this money only It was not his intention to enter michanged hands; but it should be remem- nutely into the great variety of schemes bered, that if shares were declared at one which had recently been brought forward. time worth 1001., that 1001. might be suc- If he confined himself to a very few of cessively lost by ten different people. the many which were of the same nefaAgain, it was said that the present holders rious character, he hoped it would be suf

[ocr errors]
« ForrigeFortsæt »