CHRISTCHURCH, SYDENHAM, AND SUBURBAN BUILDINGSOCIETY.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2238, 4 June 1881, Page 3

CHRISTCHURCH, SYDENHAM, AND SUBURBAN BUILDINGSOCIETY.

The adjourned annual general meeting of shareholders in the above society was hold at the offices of Mr E. J. T, Eord, Hereford street, last evening. Mr W. S. Kong, chairman of directors, occupied the chair. At the suggestion of the chairman, the minutes of the meeting on the 20th of ULay were read, in order to recall to the mind of the present meeting the business before it. The question on which the adjournment had been taken was as to whether the society should be carried on as suggested by the directors, and it was understood that in the meantime information would bo obtained as to disposing of the securities in order to realise a profit on them.

The Chairman said that the directors had made inquiries according to promise, and found that there was a society in Christchurch willing to tote over the securities of this society without cost to the borrowers. It was thought that arrangements could be made with the particular society iu question, though others had been conferred with, for most favourable terms. With regard to other matters of detail arising out of the directors* report, information was not forthcoming at that time, and Mr Langdown's absence in Dunedin prevented them going into the matter of the forged cheques.

After some remarks anent & supposed forged cheque,

The Chairman remarked that certain meetings of shareholders in the society having been called without the authority of the directors, who were guided entirely by Act of Parliament, he must repudiate the legality of such meetings.

Mr Pearce admitted that certain meetings which he bad been asked to call were informal, and while on his feet he wonld move a resolution which he had been asked to propose, namely—" That, as the borrowing powers of the directors and consequent liability of the funds of the society are limited by the Building Societies Acts, 1876 and 1880, and this limit is referred to in rule 33, it be an instruction to the directors not to apply the funds of the society in repayment of monies borrowed on deposit or loan, in excess of the limit prescribed as above.” Ho had been asked to move the resolution, which he accordingly did without comment, as it would speak for itself, and would be perfectly understood by the shareholders.

The Chairman wished to make an explanation.

Mr William Wilson seconded the resolution and made some remarks in reference to the action of the directorate, suggesting that they appeared to thwart shareholders, who wore desirous of investigation. The Chairman remarked that the directors were anxious to promote the fullest enquiry. But he must rule Mr Wilson out of order—in fact being no longer a shareholder, hit shares having been forfeited to meet fines imposed for non-payment, he was not entitled to take part in the meeting, and (he the chairman) must decline to accept him as the seconder of the resolution. With respect to the resolution, he thought the shareholders had been unfortunate in their choice of a mover. Mr Pearce told him (Mr Sing) that he knew of the defalcations long ago. He made further remarks on the same subject, the tendency of which was that a more judicious choice might have been made in selecting some one to move a resolution of the kind. The accounts appeared to have been very loosely kept, (fie referred specially to one item, being a loan to Mr Hamilton.)

Mr MoOonnel—What have your auditors been doing ? Mr England and the Chairman (simultaneously)—That’s what we want to know. Mr McOonnel said he could throw a little light on the matter in question—it was another proof of the general negligence of the directors, who had not taken the necessary precautions relative to the signing of cheques. The Chairman denied the truth of the allegation, and a rather warm discussion ensued.

The Chairman then ruled that Mr Wilson, was not entitled to vote. Mr McOonnel said be would second the resolution, and in speaking to it contended that the amount of the defalcations should be made a preferential claim against the directors.

The Chairman explained that the amount of funds secured by mortgage was £9050. Two-thirds of that amount was £5966 19s 6d, and, taking into account Charters’ defalcations, which he submitted they had a right to, their borrowing power was brought up to £8517 4s lid, and they had not yet borrowed to that extent.

Mr McOonnel contended that Mr King'd view of the question of defalcations wa» erroneous and would be tested.

Mr Pearce replied to the chairman’s remarks on his position as the mover of the resolution. He had acted according to the dictates of bis conscience in the matter of informing the directors, and submitted that ho had acted consistently throughout. At the same time, he thought the directors might have acted with slightly more celerity after obtaining information as to [defalcations discovered, which were known before Charters sailed.

The Chairman, in reply to the last remark, observed that the action taken by the directors was too prompt in Mr Pearce’s opinion at the time. The shareholders were immediately called together in order that something might be done at once, and Mr Pearce observed to him (the chairman), “I would not have told you had I known you would take action so quickly." Some further discussion ensued, in the course of which the Chairman said he believed the resolution before the meeting to be ultra vires, and, if carried, he should not act upon it unless so instructed by bis legal advisers.

Mr McOonnel said they would test the question. The resolution was then put to the meeting, and on a division the result was an equal number—26—for and against. The chairman gave his casting vote with the“noes,” and the motion was therefore lost.

Mr McOonnel then moved—“ That Messrs Harley and Ollivier be requested to ascertain the present liability of the funds of this society in respect of monies borrowed by directors, the amounts due to depositors and lent by the bankers, forming the basis of their calculation, and that the same information bo obtained for each month during the past year, at the date of the monthly meetings of the directors, and at the same dates, the amounts due by borrowers. This information to be laid before the shareholders at their next meeting.’’

Seconded by Mr England and carried,

The following motion by Mr McOonnel was lost on a division—“ That the manager be instructed to send by to-night’s post copies of the above resolution to the bankers of the society.” With regard to the continuance of the society’s operations, a brief discussion took place, Mr King explaining that favorable terms might be made for carrying on, and that it was absolutely necessary that something should be done, as they could not continue in their present crippled condition. It was ultimately resolved to further adjourn the meeting for a week. In the meantime the directors will be prepared with definite proposals, which will be considered privately by the shareholders. This being all the business, the meeting concluded with a vole of thanks to the chair.