RIFT WITHIN

Dominion, Volume 20, Issue 60, 4 December 1926, Page 15

RIFT WITHIN

FAMILY DISCORDS x

PETITION TO WIND UP CHARLES BEGG COMPANT

SETTLEMENT OUT OF COURT

Dominion Special.

Dunedin, December 8. In the Supreme Court to-day, Mr. i Justice Sim heard a petition by Alexander Alilne Begg praying that the company of Charles Begg and Co. Ltd. be wound up by the Court under the provisions of the Companies Act. Air. W. I G. Hay, who appeared for the plaintiff, in addressing the Court, said that Mr. Alex Begg had been managing director since the inception of the present com- i pany in the sixties. The late Charles Begg established the business for the sale of musical instruments, and it went on till he died in 1897. In 1899 the family at that stage consisting of the widow and her children, it was l decided to float the family concern into a public company. The assets were then £27,000. In 1908 the company, was reconstructed, and the shares distri- ( buted amongst members of the family. The assets had increased till to-day were worth £158,588. In his affidavit i Mr. Alex Begg claimed that the true value of the assets would be somewhere about £200,000. Throughout the period the petitioner had been managing director of the company, and he claimed that the success of the business had , been largely due to his efforts. At the , present time he found himself in an unfortunate position. Air. Hay went on to trace the history of the company, and said that the co®" 1 pany, being a family concern, had, with the acquiescence of the shareholders, made advances to certain, of the shareholders from time to time against their holdings in the At the present time the petitioner owed to the company £12,000 in respect of such advances. Other members of the family had also had advances. The company now demanded from the petitioner payments of. the loans made by the company to him, and had commenced an action to recover the same. , Petitioner had confessed to judgment, ; and he was not in a position to repay , the money without having to resort to the shares held by him in the company. These shares he assessed at a minimum of £41,776. ; It was suggested that the Purpose was not really to claim the £13,000 ; (the £12,000 and interest). The whole , affair had arisen out of feeling between the members of the family. There was no trouble till the will of ( Alargaret Hunter Begg was considered, in 1922. * Only since then was there any suggestion of trouble on the | minutes of the company. Mr. Hay referred to the minutes of meetings. I and suggested that His Honour would come to the conclusion that Mr. Alex. Begg was, thoroughly conversant with the affairs of the company, and knew i. more about them than the others. Orders of Air. Begg had been countermanded. ...

His Honour: "Why. doesn’t. a wealthy company like this settle i« difficulties in private? It is washing its dirty linen in public.” Air. Hay went on to say that Mr. Alex. Begg had given a life service to the company, and was entitled to some: recognition' of that service. The petitioner could go no further than make the offer to retire from the direc. torate, and make the company a publie company. Petitioner, however, had been forced' to confess judgment. Ha’ stressed that Mr. Begg was not being properly treated by Charles Erie Begg, who, to a large extent, was usurping his “position as general manager. C< E. Begg was being supported by niS two aunts Mrs. Wishart and Mary Jane Begg. Mr. Hay went on to say there was every reason why thq company should be made a public company. It had assets of nearly £200,000. It was unfortunate, repeat* ed Mr.. Hay, that the affairs had to b 4 made public. After the luncheon adjournment rt was announced that an agreement had been reached between the parties, and would be signed for presentation af the Court on Tuesday.