TRADING COMPANY.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 25 June 1924, Page 7

TRADING COMPANY.

AN AUCKLAND' CONCERN. A LIVELY MEETINGS. (by TELEGRAPH PRESS ASSOCIATION.) AUCKLAND, June 24. ’The annual meeting of tlie Farmers' Union Trading Company to-day was attended by two hundred shareholders and was lively at times. In the absence’ of the chairman of directors through indisposition, the chair w taken by Mr. A. A. Ross. i The chairman moved the adoption of the report and balance-sheet, indicating a profit for the year of £10,200, and recommending the payment of that profit to holders of A. preference shares to get rid of the liability to such shareholders. The chairman stated that an independent report on the business had been made to the directors by two outside auditors. Parts of the report he read to the meeting, indicating that the business was on a. good footing. Mr. Hannan: “What does the reserve fund amount to?” The chairman: “There is no reserve.’ 5

■ Mr. Hannan: “Is not the bank due to £67,000 at Cl per cent.?” Mr. Laidlaw stated that when the money was raised to meet bond-holders, the bank was given a mortgage, on the company’s big buildings. Mr. Hannan wanted to know what value the company had been to the country. Tt had taken their money, given them a scrap of paper and what was it worth?

A. voice -. “You are going the right way to lose it all.’ 5 Mr. W. Atwell objected to the payment of £IO,OOO profit to the holders of A. preference shares. It should be used instead of the replacement of the lost capital of ordinary shareholders. (Applause). The chairman: “By the articles of the association the directors can do nothing other than it proposed with the profit. ’ ’ Mr. Atwell held that this way of dealing with the profit would bring the ordinary shares lower than at present. The money should be used to build up ordinary shares—not to pay off losses. The chairman stated that the position was governed by the Supreme Court ruling to the effect that the profits could not go to ordinary shareholders until the liability to preference shareholders had been liquidated. Another shareholder moved as an amendment that the chairman’s report be adopted with the exception of the recommuedation that the profit be' applied to reducing the liability to holders of A. preference .shares.

Hie company’s solicitor stated that the money had to be applied as suggested by the directors according To the articles of the association, .and the amendment Avas ruled out by the chairman.

Other shareholders supported the chairman. saying that the company was m a good position, but a motion that the question be now put was lost by a large majority. Messrs Pitt and Hannan endeavoured to speak again, hut were ruled out of order by the chairman to the accompaniment of a call from excited share- “ Your ruling is rotten,” while Mr. Pitt stated that it was quite clear that shareholders were determined to nnd out just where they stood. Mr. i itt insisted that he had a right to move a further amendment that the meeting be adjourned for two months pending an investigation and a report on whether there really was a profit having regard to the outstanding accounts and the depreciation on the building, plant and fittings. The chairman replied that the solicitors had advised him that the amendment was not in order. ~ M V Hannan: “They’re hiding; they’re frightened.” The chairman: “I will ask you to usten to the company’s solicitor.” Mr. Hannan: “We won’t hear him h “* He Hot a. Then, came a sheaf of motions that the meeting disagree with the chairman sriihng, that he leave the chair nf+l th /l t adjourn. Finally’ alter the adjournment for lunch the Hininnan s motion was earned after a division, the chairman having ruled that thev must either accept or "reject it heoteTni'p “ f,,rther lon " discussion, he. ted at tunes, over a motion to consolidate the articles of association which was adopted. These new articled considerably reduce the privileges of \ pi ©fere nee shareholders. ~