The Martha Gold Mining CompaDny.

Thames Star, Volume XIII, Issue 4247, 11 August 1882, Page 2

The Martha Gold Mining CompaDny.

The following circular has been-issued to the shareholders byl Mr (T. H. Nicholls:— Auckland, 4th August, 1882. To the Shareholders of the Martha Gold Mining Company (Limited). Gentlemen,—As I have been identified with the above Company since its first formation, I conceive it to be my duty under existing circumstances to point out to you the principal reasons which induced me to resign my position, as a Director immediately after-the.termina-tion of the Extraordinary Generit Meeting of Shareholders, held on the^lat.ult. 1. That the business pf-'t|s Company fa not carried out in conformity- wtyfc the Joint Stock Act of 18«0/under, which the Company is registered, nor in accordance with the Articles of Association. 2. That the Chairman's firsV ruling, at the Extraordinary General Meeting referred to, to the effect that t her resolutions tabled by myself and'others 4 were informal upon the ground that no notice had been given of them in the requisition convening the meeting, was' not'in accordance with the 38th section of the Articles of Association whjclfe -provides that three days' notice prgvtMgf fo the day appointed for the bijfdYidt of the meeting shall be sufficieat^jjLlEhat the Chairman's ruling that the* said meeting had no power to' elect ne vf^ unless by a special resolution to be con* firmed at a" subsequent Extraordinary General Meeting, to be held witnin a period of not less than one month, was contrary to the Act and Articles of Association. 4. That the Chafrtean's'ruling that, if the Directors;,^^^*^pJ«Sfntarily, that no fresh tieimt^cdM take place at the meeting, unless by special resolution, to be •» above, was wrong. In adSraiiiag^bta circular to the Shareholders of the Company, I take this opportunity to assert that I am not actuated by.any feeling of animosity against my late W>Direetori, but I consider that a "Director in every Company has, by reason of the trust reposed in him, a faithful duty to perform, not only to himself but above all to the Company whose s»fety it entrusted to his care, and as I have failed to awaken the Board to a true aensa of what I may term its lamentable tion, I have taken what I consider to b« a legitimate course, viz., a direst appeal to each individual shareholder. In eon« elusion allow me to state that since send'