Gefending counsel), Mr. Seth said, that the China Finanice Corporation, apart from actually owning the shares of the Guaranty Underwriters China Ltd, had not at any time exercised control over the business of the latter company. Further that there was nothing to prevent the Guaranty Underwriters of China, Ltd, being turned into a public company capable of issuing shares Warrant to bearer.
Regarding the liquidation of the company, Mr. Seth said that on May 1 a letter was sent to the Registrar of Companies stating the company was to be liquidated. That, he said' was in addition to the Deputy Regis-rar of Companies being formally Informed by the fling of a declara-ton of solvency on May 14, Counsel: Who signs the cheques Guaranty Underwriters of China Mr. Seth explained that all cheques lof the company required the signature of two directors or one director. fond the secretary. He also stated that the recounts of the company were kept entirely separate from those of the other two firms with which he was also connected. The handing over to the China Finance Corporation involved big contingent abilities, Mr. Seth said, but stated that the time required fo liquidate, either the Guaranty Underwriters of China, Ltd, or the Finance Banking Corporation, Ltd, was hard to judge.
In answer to questions put by the Registear Mr. Seth said he received nominal fee as managing director of the Guaranty Underwriters of China, Ltd. Mr. Seth said that he was the one who accepted the risk: Jon all policies of the General Accl-Jdent, Fire, and Insurance Ca, Ltd. for which the Guaranty Under-_ writers of China Ltd, were the agents.
Registrar: Apart from your director's fees you receive nothing else?—Twas paid a certain sum to cover my duties for all three companies, for convenience sake.
Mr. Seth explained that he was Jatiowed to allocate proportions of this sum as received from each of the three companies as he desired, Mr. MeNeill then addressed the. Registrar, in reply, on points of law raised by defending counsel during the latter's address to the bench.
The basis of his reply was that, although an incorporated company might be British in nationality, the Jcharacter of its members could be quired into for the purpose ascertaining—in the words of Sir Haviland de Sausmaurez—whether was a bona fide British company. He held that the Registrar could in-Jquire into the character of the members and the manner in which business was conducted under Article 194, sub-section 2, of the China Order in Council.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.