October 24. 1868.

Aus:
The Money Market Review, 24. Oktober 1868. S. 379/380.
Schließen
Icon dass Zitate symbolisiert

The Merchant’s Co. (lim.) and the Criminal charge against the directors.

1865 Co. formed to take over the business of Mssrs. Lane, Hankey et Co under the name of the Merchants Co. (lim.) The Prospectus issued in November 1865 with Richard Stuart Lane, Horace Edward Chapman, and Frederick John Helbert Helbert, the partners in the old firm, as directors. The partners undertook to liquidate all the debts and liabilities of the firm. They were to receive £62,500 in debentures and paid up shares of the Co. for the goodwill of the business only; they guaranteed to the shareholders 10% upon the paid up capital for a certain number of years. Total amount of capital paid upon the shares £45,000. In October, 1866, after about 10 months’ existence, the Co. stopped payment. Mssrs Lane, Hankey, et Co. had received from the Co. debentures for £25,000, and shares with £15 per share paid to the amount of £37,500, being the amount to be paid for the goodwill. On 22. August, 1866, a couple of months before the Co. stopped payment, the partners filed a deed of inspection under the Bankruptcy Act, for the winding up of their affairs. The debts of the partnership, as |46 then sworn by the partners, were:

Debts of Lane, Hankey, et Co. £.282,498
Debts of R. J. Lane 69,315
Do. F. J. Helbert Helbert 13,735
Do. H. E. Chapman 6,245
Total £371,793.

On failure of Co., a committee of shareholders appointed to investigate its affairs, mit Chairmen: Benjamin Moore, of Moorgate Chambers, he had 100 shares, on which he had paid 1000£. Committee desired to examine the books of the partnership. But Lane, Hankey, and Co. refused to give up their books, or produce them for inspection. Co. are still in liquidation und die Co. inserted in the list of creditors of Lane, Hankey et Co. for £45,000 and upwards, being the whole of the paid up capital of the Co., of which, it seems, they had become possessed, in addition to the £62,500 for the good will, and in addition also to £10,000 of acceptances which the Co. had given for their accommodation. No dividend hitherto paid under the deed of inspection. Nach 2 J. quiescence der shareholders, Mr. Moore laid certain evidence before the Lord Mayor, and obtained summonses against Stuart Lane, Chapman, and Helbert, under einer Clause des Acts von 1861, for having „unlawfully made, circulated, and published a prospectus etc“. Person guilty thereof, nach diesem Statut, liable, if convicted, to penal servitude for 7 years. On 2 October the defendants appeared, obtained adjournment on ground that an analysis of the accounts was being prepared by an accountant employed by the defendants. On 9. Oct. defendants again appeared. Der Advokat des Ankläger Moore, G. Lewis, jun., declared that nach der Einsicht der analysis des account alles all right, daher Moore als Ankläger withdrew the summons. Vallance (counsel für Lane) und Metcalf Metcalfe (für Chapman und Helbert) „thanked Mr. Lewis for the frank way in which he had acquitted those gentlemen of any fraudulent motives etc“ „freed their clients from imputation“ etc. Andrerseits complimentirten die Sachwalter den Clienten von Lewis als „perfectly honourable gentleman … put forward by other persons behind the scenes, whose real object was to damage his clients“. Lord Mayor jedoch doubted. By a few questions he ascertained that Moore, besides being so perfectly satisfied with „the analysis of accounts“ had stipulated for the payment of the money he had lost. Lord Mayor required „the informations on which he had acted in granting the summons to be read in open court.“ Diese informations on oath filed in this case state ugly facts. Barlow, the colonial manager of the Merchants’ Co. from its formation until stopping payment, had sworn distinctly, that statement in prospectus, that Lane, Hankey et Co had made profits during 6 years previous to 1865, was false, for they were in 1865 hopelessly insolvent, had been so for years, annual losses instead of profits making. He further deposed on oath that on 2nd May 1866, at office of the Co., H. E. Chapman informed him that the firm of Lane, Hankey et Co ought to have stopped payment in 1861; that when he (Chapman) joined them in June 1863, the said R. S. Lane declared there was £65,000 capital in the concern, „instead of which there was £75,000 the other way, and the concern was completely rotten.“

Aus:
The Money Market Review, 24. Oktober 1868. S. 380.
Schließen
Icon dass Zitate symbolisiert

Joint Stock Cos. Parliam. Return on 31st May 1868.

1863: registered 790 Cos., with nominal capital at £139,988,242
1864 997 Cos, with nom. capital 237,437,084
1865 1,0333 1,033 Cos 205,391,818
1866 762 76,824,823
1867 479 31,444,982
1868 von 1st Jan. bis 31 May 203 registered mit £13,896,182 Unlimited Cos. 9.

Objects – Rede von denen zwischen 1st Jan. bis 31 May 1868 [–] so various as possible. Z.B. 1) supplies Colyton mit gas, 2) Poole and Cherbourg Steam Packet Co., 3) Eastbourn Eastbourne Baths and Laundry Co., 4) Liverpool Merchant Tailors’ Co, and so forth. N. 1 (Colyton gas) had at date of last return 19 shareholders, who had taken 73 shares out of £300 created, and yet Co. returned as „still in operation“. N. 2 (Poole and Cherb. Steam Packet) originally 108 subscribers, for 800 shares, representing £4,000 capital, at the last return only 131 shareholders, who had paid upon their shares £1,275. This concern do. described as „still in operation“. N. 3 (Eastbourne Baths etc), described as „having no place of business“, aber nominal capital of £10,000 in 1000 shares. This Co. supposed to be „still in operation“, but „no return“ as to number of shareholders, calls received, calls made, shares taken. N. 4 (Merchant Tailors’ Co) is being „wound up“, which means, we suppose, that it is no Co. at all. Von den 393 (in 1868) 4 are being termed as „wound up“, 5 as „in operation“, 341 Cos. supposed to be „still in operation“. Of the 9 „unlimited“ no account. Hence seem to stand on no better footing than the unlimited.

Aus:
The Money Market Review, 24. Oktober 1868. S. 385/386.
Schließen
Icon dass Zitate symbolisiert

Seignorage on Coin.

In all the mints of the world except England. In Paris mint 2%, Australian mint 7,5 on large parcels, and 10% on small ones; in the Indian mints 1%. In English mint (London) nominally gold is coined free, aber practice of restricting tenders of gold to £10,000 tends to fix a duty of 11/2d. p. oz. – i.e., the difference between coin gold £3. 17s. 101/2d. per oz., und the price paid by the B.o.E. for gold bullion, £3. 17s. 9d. which is equal to 0.16%.

Aus:
The Money Market Review, 24. Oktober 1868. S. 387.
Schließen
Icon dass Zitate symbolisiert

Conversion of Iron into Steel.

Several years since Bessemer carried to successful issue the pneumatic process which bears his name for the manufacture of steel from pig iron. His process demands iron of the first brand, as is unequal to the conversion of iron of inferior quality, charged with impurities of phosphorus and sulphur in large quantities.

Thus, until very recently, no marketable steel has been produced from Cleveland or Northamptonshire pig. Now process patented by Heaton, of the Langley Mill, in the Erewash valley, by which inferior iron made into first class steel, thus utilising for the higher purposes of manufacture vast deposits of ore hitherto condemned to the lowest rank. The process is chemical not mechanical, great economy of time and labour appears thus secured. Nitrate of soda is the agent employed. Tensile and resisting strength of steel manufactured by this method. Saving in cost of production said to be several £ a ton.|

Inhalt:

  • Inhaltsverzeichnis von Friedrich Engels
  • 1869 I Heft
  • Money Market. 1868.
  • Money Market Review. Jahrgang 1868.
  • The Economist. Jahrgang 1868. Nachträge
    • The Economist. Jahrgang 1868.
    • Inhaltsregister für 1868 Jahrgang. („Money Market Review“ und „Economist“.)
    • Kommentar zu George Joachim Goschen
      • George J. Goschen: The Theory of the Foreign Exchange. 7th edit. London 1866.
      • Friedrich Ernst Feller, Carl Gustav Odermann: Das Ganze der kaufmännischen Arithmetik
      • Inhalt.