FACTORY MEETINGS.

Pahiatua Herald, Volume XLI, Issue 12430, 24 August 1933, Page 7

FACTORY MEETINGS.

“ DRY " SHAREHOLDERS. RIGHT TO VOTE AT MEETINGS. A matter of very great interest to dairy company directors—the right to “dry” shareholders to vote in person or by proxy—was discussed at the annual meeting of the Pap at awa Dairy Company on Saturday. The matter was brought forward in the following notice of motion moved by Mr R. T. Mabey and seconded by Mr W. Gilliland: “That the Articles of Association of the company be so altered as to cancel the right of a shareholder who is not a supplier to the company to vote either in person or by proxy.” The pros and cons of this question were debated very fully at the last annual meeting, but no action was then taken owing to difficulty in framing a suitable motion. A letter was read from the company’s solicitors, stating it was quite legal to deny voting power to dry shareholders - The secretary CMr J. G. Brechin) said that if all votes in the company were cast, the total would be 117. Of these 38 were in the name of people who were not supplying milk. If these non-suppliers combined their votes, there was a possibility of their being able to prevent a bonus being paid out. It was a very dangerous position. The chairman (Mr C. F. Baker) : How many iDroxy votes are in tori ajr p The secretary: Twenty-two. The chairman: A director must be a supplier and a party to the joint guarantee. A dry shareholder cannot hold a seat on the board. Mr West: He can be represented by the man holding the “dry” proxy votes. ♦The secretary : There are too many dry shares. The company cannot afford to buy them, nor should they be obliged to. , The chairman The dry shareholders still have capital invested and are unable to derive any advantage from it. # The secretary: The factory plant is there, and they have a right to supply milk. Tf the quota come in and the butter market slumped, many of these dry shareholders would come back to the factory, which would be compelled to take their milk. The issue was then put to a ballot, a three-fourths majority being necessary. The voting was interesting, being as follows-. For the motion, 75; against, 26. As 101 votes were cast it was difficult to say whether the motion had been carried or not. It was decided to hold a second ballot, which resulted: For, 77; against, 23; informal, 1. The motion was thus carried., and henceforth dry shareholders will not be able to vote in person or by proxy.