36

8.—12

come, as companies do, for an extension of time, I think—certainly it would be so to my mind—that their coming for an extension of time under the alteration, and with the improved facilities that Parliament had given, would be regarded with suspicion as evidence of the want of intrinsic merit in the scheme, and that the extension of time would therefore not be so likely to be granted. I think, in fact, that the public would get the railways made with greater certainty than they do at the present time. And I may perhaps add one word with reference to the independence of certain schemes : we think very strongly, as an independent railway, that it is not a desirable thing that small, and perhaps very beneficial, undertakings should be amalgamated with larger affairs; the perpetuation of monopolies by the amalgamation of great interests we do not think is in the interest of the public. Mr. John Chaeles Bees recalled, and further examined. 361. The Chairman.] I believe you have some paper to hand in? —I hand in a list of the directors named in the Eailway Bills to which I referred in my evidence.on Tuesday last. [The same was handed in.] Then I quoted, as an illustrative case, the case of the Ely and. Newmarket Eailway, in which an agreement was scheduled to the Act, by which a large company virtually allowed the payment of interest during construction as part of the actual cost of the works. I merely wish to hand in the prospectus which was issued by that company, by which it appears that in that case the result of that arrangement was the direct payment of interest out of capital by the company itself [handing in the prospectus]. Mr. E. W. Peeks examined. 362. The Chairman.] You are a solicitor practising in London in partnership with Mr. H. H. Fowler, M.P., as I understand ? —I am. 363. And you have a considerable knowledge from your business of the question now being discussed before this Committee ?—I have knowledge of it, not merely in connection with railways that I am directly and indirectly connected with, but also with reference to trustees and private investors, and particularly with reference to stockbrokers, whom I frequently advise with reference to the validity of these arrangements before they are put forward to the public. 364. I understand that you are opposed to the repeal, and even the alteration in the sense proposed, of the present Standing Order ?—I think it would be undoubtedly most mischievous. I think with Sir Edward Watkin—he did not altogether father the suggestion—that the proper method is to give notice to the public of payment of interest by issuing stock at a discount in the case of original capital. 365. Is it your opinion that an effectual remedy for the evils now complained of would be to alter the Eailway Companies Act of 1867 and the Companies Clauses Act of 1869, so as to authorize the issuing of original as well as new stock at a discount ?—Yes, that is my opinion. 366. Have you been in the room all to-day ?—Not the whole of the day. I had to go before Lord Eedesdale ; but until two o'clock I was here. 367. But you have heard the evidence given by various gentlemen exactly to the opposite effect to this opinion of yours ?—That is so ; but I look at it more in the case of people who are misled by the prospectuses, and induced to invest their money on the faith of prospectuses which perhaps, if they were technical experts familiar with all the devices adopted, would not be misleading, but which are misleading to any ordinary investor. For instance, a man who has invested his £100 in Hull and Barnsley stock would not be familiar with the fact that his £20, which he is to get during the next five years, was coming back out of his own pocket; and therefore, on that ground, I think it would be far more honest to tell him so, and, if he was going to pay himself his interest for four years, he should therefore take it in the shape of a discount on the original issue. 368. We have been informed to-day that practically that would be inoperative : is that your opinion ? —No ; I think it would be extremely well for the advocates of the change if they could induce the Committee to think so. Ido not think that any sensible man would take stock in a company if he knew he was going to receive his money for the next four years out of his own pocket, unless he were a person of sufficient capital to be induced to be content with no interest at all, or only a small rate of interest for some years. 369. That is not quite an answer to my question ; my question was with reference to the evidence given to us that it would be all very well to alter the Acts as you propose, but that practically it would have no operation, because the public would not be induced to take shares in new companies the shares of which were issued at a discount ? —I do not like to express an opinion about that; but I can cite the case of a railway referred to on a former day here, which within the last few months has issued a capital of £600,000 upon a perfectly honest and legitimate prospectus with no guarantee from any large company at all; and that seems to me a very good illustration of a company, even under existing legislation, being enabled to issue capital where there is a bond fide scheme without resort to these contrivances. I refer to the Mersey Eailway Company, where a capital of £600,000 was recently raised in this way, where there is no guarantee of any sort, and no promise to pay interest during construction out of capital. Then, there is another little company, which was being advertised in the papers a few days ago, called the Helston Eailway, in the "West of England, which has, I understand, had all its capital subscribed, and there there is no proposal to guarantee interest during construction. In the Mersey case the capital is £600,000 issued, and in the other case that I have referred to it is simply £60,000. 370. Then in your opinion things are very good as they are, and ought not to be altered?—l think they are very good as they are. I think the class of people who would be attacked, if I may use the phrase, by the alteration in the Standing Order would be very small investors who are constantly looking out for a safe 5 per cent, investment. 371. I asked you, without consulting the Coftimittee, to give evidence here, because you had stated to me that in your opinion what is wanted is the alteration of these Acts of which we have