TRUST COMPANIES

Grey River Argus, 20 October 1934, Page 5

TRUST COMPANIES

SYDNEY INQUIRY Debenture Holders’ Position (Aus. & N 77. Table Assn.) (Received October 18 at 5.5 p.m.) SYDNEY, October 19. Allegations that attempts have been made to induce the debenture holders in the Southern British Trust Coy to exchange their holdings for shares in another company were made by Mr Bryan Fuller when addressing the Royal Commission, which resumed toMr Abrahams, K.C., announced that he had been asked to appear for certain debenture holders whose names were contained in a petition to the Commissioner. They did not uesire to disclose the contents of the petition at the moment. They had combined to protect themselves from people who were opposing their interests. They wished the Commission to circularise all of the debenture holders with i report of its findings, before making a second report recommending alterations. The hearing is proceeding.

The New Scheme TO LINK UP WITH MCINN—CCMPANYS COMMISSIONER AGAINST IT. (Aus. & N.Z. Cable Assn.) (Received October 18 nt 8 p.m.) SYDNEY October IS. At the Companies Commission. Mr Brian Fuller said that he had to objection to representatives of the de-lienture-ho’ders appearing, l, l; t a frank statement should be made and Counsel should be allowed to appear. Mr Fuller continued that he had been informed that debenture-holders had been approached in Brisbane with a suggestion that they should exchange their debentures for shares in another company, which mas controlled by a certain person who had appeared before the Commission, and that one of the Directors of that company was an agent for Melnnes

The Commissioner said that he would not support any suggestion that ar.v company with which Melnnes any connection should have anything to do with the taking over of the affairs of these companies. Mr Fuller said that one of the Directors of the company to which he had referred was Foster. The scheme was that debenture-holders in the South British Coy should hand over their debentures in exchange for shares in another company and that the Commissioner should value the debentures and get the debentureholders hand them over to this other company.

The Commissioner: Tam not going to do anything like that, whatever happens. One of the main objects of this Commission is to try to preserve the interests of the people who have invested their money. 7 ’ The Commissioner added that it appeared to be necessary to ea'l a debenture-holders' meeting, but he did not know who would bear the cost of circularising all of the debentureholders (with copies of his findings on the facts. Mr Abraham stated definitely that he did not represent the Melnnes interests. He said: “In the information that I have alt present, there is bitter hostility to Melnnes. As regards Foster, I have heard his name.’’ Mr Abraham said that i twai desired to form a Debenture-holders Protection Asssociation, so that submissions might be put before the Commissioner as to what he might recommend.

Another counsel, Mr Selwyn Betts said that, he had substantially the same instructions as Mr Abraham from another group of the debenture-hold-ers.

The Commissioner Judge Haise Rodgers, sai'd that any help from people who were submitting the views of the debenture-holders would be very acceptable. WARNING TO DEBENTURE HOLDERS. MR HAMPSON APPEARS. SYDNEY, October 19. At the Commission the Commissioner said he thought that the debentureholders should be warned to be very careful about accepting any suggestions to put their money into any company on the basis that it would be authorised by the Commission tn take over tho assets. It wou’d not be competent for the Commission to make such 'a. proposal and there was very little likelihood of the Legislature adopting that method of settling the affairs of the companies. He would probably recommend to the Government that a receiver of the assets as far as they came within jurisdiction of New South Wales should be appointed so that during the time steps 'were being taken to ascer tain the desires of the debenture holders, there would be no possibility of the assets being dealt with in any way.

Mr H. S. Nicholas appeared on behalf of the Now Zealand Govern He submitted the transactions which were the subject of the cables between Mr Hampson Auckland, solicitor and the Commission should not be inquired into by the Commissiorer. H. M. Hampson of Nelw Zealand, solicitor, said that he wished to contradict statements that were made in the New Zealand Commission’s report. The Commissioner said that he could not accept the position of Judge as between the New Zealand Commissioner and Hampson. Mr Hampson proceeded to make a statement about the Redwood Company Mortgagees. Then the Commissioner remarked that it appeared to have nothing to do with iwhiat he was investigat-

ing. He said: “If you don’t choose to give this evidence before the New Zealand Commission, it seems extm ordinary that you won’t give it before me.” The Commission then adjourned till Monday.