Untitled

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume IX, Issue 923, 5 March 1881, Page 4

The meeting of shareholders in the South Pacific Petroleum Company to be held on Monday evening next, will do well to frame a resolution, so as to act in unison in regard to the further payment of calls. Circulars have been addressed to those who have not paid up their calls, that unless the second and third calls are paid, with interest thereou at the rate of 10 per cent per annum, together with accrued, expenses, by Tuesday next, the Bth of March, the said shares will be liable to be forfeited. Now what does this mean ? Shares are Halle to be forfeited from the expiration of the day and hour originally fixed for the payment of calls on them, and which calls were not so paid It certainly may be only an intimation, a timely reminder of consequences, thinking, poss-ibly, that a serious looking document signed by the Secretary, will have a kind of over-awing effect. In the present aspect of affairs, we do not know what to counsel or suggest. It would be unwise to do aught that would embarrass the Directors, or jeopardise the shareholders’ interests ; still it can hardly be expected that these calls will be so promptly paid, as if matters were differently placed. The fact cannot be denied that shareholders are beginning to calculate the difference between present and future loss ; and they are not seriously disturbed by the reflection that if shares

are forfeited, liability does not cease, for the Directors can sue for the calls, interest, and expenses remaining unpaid at the time of forfeiture. But will the Directors do this in respect of the New Zealand shareholders ? It occurs to us that they will not pursue such a course, inasmuch as the remedy would be worse than the disease. To recover in this colony, where proceedings would have to be taken, would land the Company in a sea of trouble and expense. But, in this connection, it is worth while considering the advisability of probing the matter still deeper. For instance, it is likely that the Directors are attempting to harass the New Zealand shareholders, until they become so disgusted that they fall away from the company, and Sydney will get the works entirely into their own hands. Again, there is a grave doubt as to the bona fide position of the company’s lease. If we mistake not, one of the conditions of occupation of the ground was that £2OOO was to have been spent by the company during the first year. The year is past, but it seems improbable that that sum has been spent. Anyhow, look at the matter in what light we will, there is much to engage the serious attention of the forthcoming meeting.