TRUST COY. METHODS

Grey River Argus, 4 October 1934, Page 5

TRUST COY. METHODS

SOME SIDELIGHTS Judge’s Misgivings < An-S. & N Z. Cable Assn.) (Re< r ved October 3 * p m.> SYDNEY. October 3. At the Companies Commission to • lay. Mr McGhie. nho is appe trhig for the Mrlnnes Companies, explained the dispute that had arisen between the Southern British Naional Trust and V. B. Mdnnes, Australia. Ltd. After this explanation. Judge Haise Rogers the Commissioner. remark -d that the only importance wr.n-h he at‘a< hed to this discussion was th* light i, threiv ou the business meth ods that were employed. Mr W. W. Monahan, K C.: ‘ And the hope’essness of getting a balance sheet! Even on the r own st:Cem<*nt. Mdnnes admits that he ro taino,] commissi*.»n that was tot T»avnb'e. ’ ’ G-’asson said that Mdnnes had been remonstrated with —McArthur having gone so far as to write to him on the subject. The Commissioner remarked that a letter which he had icreived from Queensland requ red some attention, as it migli* have some be irir g on the Mdnnes Company's methods. The Commissioner said this letter alleged that members of Mdnnes and Company’s Queensla* 1 staff had been unable to obtain their salaries for some weeks.

Woman’s Bank Deposit AN EXCHANGE IN DEBENTURES. WAS IT ABOVE BOARD. SYDNEY, October 3. At the Companies Commission, Mrs Elizabeth Essery, residing at Sydney, gave evidence relating to a transaction with a man who called on her, representing himself as from the defunct Primary Producers’ Bank, in which she had a deposit of £136. He asked her to sign some papers, saying that she was to get twenty-seven pounds later. She was privately informed that she was foolish to sign any papers. She received twenty-seven pounds, and later 9s Id interest on debentures. Her financial circumstances became so precarious that she called at the office whence the man had come, in order to ascertain when the next dividend was payable. The Commissioner, after perusing the papers, said that, Apparently, Mrs. Esserv had assigned to the Southern British National Trust in September, 1933, ,the sum of £136 in payment for debentures, and that a man named R. Stiebel had received the assignment.

Mrs. Essery, replying to Mr M<*Ghie, said that she had not understood the meaning of the debentures but she knew that she was getting thirteen “things” worth ten pounds each. The Commissioner remarked that this was the type of case which he had been asked to inquire into in order to determine whether there should be an entire prohibition of hawking from door to door. He remarked: “This case also shows that the agents of this company were in full possession of all of the details of the deposits in the Primary Producers Bank.” Mr Fuller: “My company. the Southern British National Trust, told the lady all about the transaction.” Mdnnes Companies IN AWKWARD POSITION. (Received October 3 at 7.15 p.m.) SYDNEY, October 3. At the companies commission. Arthur Hill, Secretary to two of the MeTunes companies and the liquidator of a. third, was questioned about the money owing to the company’s Queensland staff. He said, that he was looking into the whole position. Mr Monahan: “How Jo you propose to pa v these outstanding salaries, without money in the bank 9” Hill: “We have some assets that we can dispose of.” Hill was next examined about payments made by a Mdnnes company, and the Commissioner commented on the indiscriminate way that cheques appeared to have been drawn from a cheque book. Hill replied: “I think there is a reason for that.” The Commissioner interjected: 4 ‘lt is a most extraordinary cheque book.” Mr Monahan next quoted extracts from ithe minutes of a Board meeting of Mdnnes and Company, held since the opening of the Commission, two Directors having come from New Zealand to attend. At this meeting, he said, Mr Dowdy had expressed great surprise and a^ arm a t the alleged position of the Trust Companies. He comp’ained that he had been badly misled in regard to the list of securities, nnd also in regard to the Trust Building. Mr Monahan then read the names of those present at that meeting including the Secretary, and he asked Hill whether this minute were a correct record.

Hill answered: ”1 do not know. I wn«. not present.” Mr "Monahan: “Wei! minutes say that the secretarv present. Who prepared the m'inutes?” Hill: “I do not know.” Mr McGhie ini'erp'osed: “Tt is badly put in 'the minutes. His name is not mentioned as being present.” Mr Monahan.- “Were the minutes handed over to you?” Hill: “No.” McArthur’s cloaking OPERATIONS. (Received October 3 at 11 p.m.) SYDNEY. October 3. The Commissioner, Judge Haise Rogers, speaking in regard to the New

Zealand barrister, Hamson’s, letter, cabled yesterday, said he did not sea that there was any real relevance in the points raised by the letter. The Commission was mainly concerned with happenings since the Investment Executive Trust started operations. McArthur had been invited to say why transfers had been made through certain channels. He had produced a statement of fact, but had not shown why Modern Homes, Limited, was galvanised into life, or why other companies had been involved. “That meant,” added the Commissioner, “that T had to pursue ‘all these devious by-paths.’ ” McArthur had admitted that great numbers of these transactions were done to cloak the fact that he was holding certain assets, and to prevent his creditors from getting those assets, after they were successful in certain legal actions. Doctor Louat (for the companies): “I do not think that he said that they were for the purpose of misleading his creditors.” The Commission adjourned till tomorrow. N.Z. DEBENTURE HOLDERS. PROPOSED COMMITTEE. CHRISTCHURCH, October 3. A circular to the debenture holders in the Investment Executive Trust of New Zealand, Ltd., one of the companies of the McArthur Group, proposing the establishment of a Debenture Holders’ Committee to protest their interest, has been received in Christchurch. The circular is signed by Norman Levy, of Wellington, and W. W. Madden, of Auckland, who claim that their combined interests as debenture holders amount to over £12.000.

The circular states that it is proposed to form a Debenture Holders’ Committee of four, one each representing Auckland. Wellington, Canterbury and Otaco. The circular states that immediately replies to the circular come to hand, the debenture holders will be supplied with the names of persons prepared tn act on such Committee. and the debenture holders will be asked to record their vote. Messrs Levy and Madden state that they will act merely as returning officers to ensure the election of the committee proposed. Meantime the services of an Auckland accountant have been secured as interim secretary, and counsel has been retained.