INVESTMENT TRUST

Southland Times, Issue 22491, 28 January 1935, Page 8

INVESTMENT TRUST

WELLINGTON DEBENTUREHOLDERS. LIQUIDATION NOT FAVOURED. (Per United Press Association.) Wellington, January 26. The Wellington debenture-holders in Investment Executive Trust, Ltd., met to discuss their views of the position. After lengthy discussion it was decided to recommend to the Debenture-hold-ers’ Committee to carry on and resist compulsory liquidation. Steps were taken to establish a fund to defray the expenses. Mr L. W. Swan (secretary of the Debenture-holders’ Committee), said there were many holders who had the impression that their shares were more or less valueless, but figures that he had given to the Auckland meeting proved clearly that that view was absurd. A well-known firm of Sydney valuers had valued the Trust building in Sydney at £350,000. There was no doubt that that valuation was a conservative one. A poll had been taken in Australia of debenture-holders in the South British National Trust (a sister company to Investment Trust) and approximately 60 per cent, had voted for reconstruction, notwithstanding the fact that the Commissioner (Mr Justice Haise Rogers) had given strong indications that he preferred liquidation. Mr Norman Levy (a member of the committee) said the committee felt that the issue was overwhelmingly in favour of reconstruction. Reconstruction was not inspired by Mr McArthur, but originated in the committee. Since August 19 Trust Investments had gone up, increasing from £20,000 to £30,000. That increase would cover them more than pound for pound, and the assets were free from all liabilities. The only persons who would benefit from liquidation were the liquidators and the stockbrokers. The assets were the property of the debenture-holders and they should handle them. COMPANY’S ATTITUDE ALTERATION OF ARTICLES. (Per United Press Association.) Dunedin, January 27. Shareholders in the Trustees, Executors and Agency Company were required on Friday to note a proposal to increase the capital of the company and amend and strengthen the Articles of Association.

It is understood that the purpose of the amending articles is to meet the possibility of what may be termed the “McArthur Group” securing a dominating number of shares in the company. It is stated that the group has already purchased a large percentage of the shares, but that only a small number so far have been transferred to it. If the voting is favourable to an increase in capital, the directors are to have the right to discriminate and to say to whom the new shares are to be sold. It is stated that two Dunedin solicitors are holding shares in the Trustees, Executors and Agency Company on behalf of the “McArthur Group” and that these have now been transferred to them. The Public Trustee is controlling the interests of the debenture-holders in the “McArthur Group” and through the two solicitors referred to is opposing the intention of the Trustees, Executors and Agency Company, as it is contended that the alteration in the Articles of Association and the increase in capital will affect the interests and assets of the debenture-holders in the “McArthur Group.”