§ Mr. BOTTOMLEYasked whether, in the light of further investigation into the affairs of the Law Guarantee and Trust Society, Limited, the President of the Board of Trade is now prepared to direct the Official Receiver to take the necessary steps for obtaining a compulsory liquidation with a view to securing full inquiry into the affairs of the company?
Mr. BUXTONI have made careful and personal inquiry into the question, and have taken the advice of the Law Officers as to the powers of the Board of Trade, and I am advised that the Board of Trade have no power to order an inquiry into the affairs of a company in voluntary liquidation, and that the power to appoint an inspector under Section 109 of the Companies (Consolidation) Act is confined to living companies. I have, in answer to previous questions, pointed out that the only means provided by law for an official investigation into the affairs of a company in liquidation is the inquiry which is conducted by the Official Receiver into the affairs of every company which is ordered to be wound up by the court. The powers and duties of the Official Receiver do not, however, arise until an order for winding up has been made by the court. The only possible step open to any officer of the Board of Trade to secure a winding-up order is the presentation of a petition by the Official Receiver. The Official Receiver's right to petition the court is, however, limited to cases where he is in a position to prove that the voluntary 846 winding up cannot be continued with due regard to the interests of the creditors or shareholders. A petition by the Official Receiver thus requires evidence of a special nature to support it. I am fully disposed to view with sympathy the wishes of hon. Members who have put questions to me on the subject of the Law Guarantee Trust and Accident Society. I have, however, as yet no such evidence before me, but if proper evidence is laid before me—that is to say, statements of definite facts, with the names of the persons who are willing to substantiate them on oath—I will at once lay the statements before my legal advisers in order to ascertain whether they are sufficient to give the court jurisdiction in the matter. I may remind my hon. Friend that the normal method by which an order is obtained for the winding up of a company by the court is by means of a petition presented by a creditor or by a shareholder; and in the present case it is open to any creditor and to any shareholder of the company to petition the court for such an order.
§ Mr. BOTTOMLEYHas the right hon. Gentleman received from me personally a very specific statement of the facts, and has not he also received a representation from the Lord Chief Justice of England, who is a shareholder in this company, expressing his opinion that there is great need for a public and full examination?
Mr. BUXTONThe hon. Member kindly sent me the statement to which he refers, and I have read the report of the remarks of the Lord Chief Justice, and, as pointed out, certain statements are made therein. But in order that I may move I must have statements made by those who are willing to be responsible for them, and who are prepared to substantiate them on their oath if necessary, and I would be very glad to discuss such statements if my hon. Friend will submit them. Statements made in the newspapers in which the names of persons who are prepared to substantiate them are not given, are not quite statements in the sense to which I have referred. If those who have made them are prepared to come forward and substantiate them on oath I will be very glad to lay them before the Law Officers with that object.
§ Mr. GIBSON BOWLESHow is it possible to substantiate statements on oath unless some court investigates the matter? It would not be done by a private oath.
Mr. BUXTONI do not ask them to send that evidence to me on oath. What I would like to see is sufficient substantiation to justify me under the Act in moving in the matter. Evidence sent to me may afterwards have to be substantiated on oath if it is sufficient to justify the case being sent into court.