In our last issue we felt called upon to make a few remarks upon the peculiar conduct of those who managed the affairs of the New Gobur Company. Since then the unpaid workmen sold the right, title, and interest of the company to a certain lease on which it was supposed the machinery stood. As, however, the machinery stands on another lease, the ground was allowed to go for £5. This, of course, will not cover the bailiff's fees and other expenses; so the £200 still remains unpaid. The next step will be to sell the other lease. If through a stubborn determination not to pay the debts incurred by the managers, the second lease is sold for another £5, the men will still be unpaid, and possibly the honest mangers may - chuckle and crow, and say to themselves, “We have beaten, these follows after all - they can now get their wages where they like."
The matter, however, is not likely to rest here, for it will be the duty of the working men of the district to unite and each subscribe a shilling or such other sum as may be required to test this question in the Supreme Court. To our thinking, "limited liability" means, that each shareholder is, responsible to the extent of the unpaid calls on the script held, and no further; but if the directors incur liabilities beyond the capital of the company, then they are personally responsible for that amount, and are collectively and individually liable for every shilling that they were not warranted in expending as set forth in the memorial of registration. As the New Gobur Company have absorbed their last call, the directors have done a wrong and dishonest thing in incurring liabilities beyond the capital of the company, and can be proceeded against not only personally but criminally until they have paid the amount due.
|!||The text has been retyped from a microfiche copy of the original.
We have taken care to reproduce this document but areas of the original text may been damaged.