The ATTORNEY-GENERAL-That the law would forbid them to do; they could not have two Companies of the same name. The others are private partnerships. Of course I am not aware what the articles of association in those cases are, but there is no doubt this Company could only be dissolved by the provision in the articles of association when the loss amounts to half its capital.
Mr. KESWICK-The Act provides for the winding up of the China Traders' as much as any other Company.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL-Any other Company can start under the same name, but this Company can do it by no other means than by winding up and starting under a new name. They certainly could only start afresh as an entirely new Company. They must go through the whole process of registration afresh.
Mr. KESWICK-That is not very formidable.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL-It is necessary they should wind it up publicly and make an entirely fresh start.
Mr. RYRIE-You forget that both processes can go on simultaneously.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL-No, that is just the point on which I wish the hon. member to understand me. They cannot start afresh till the other is wound up.
The voting for the passing of the Ordinance ensued, with same result as in the previous divisions.
It was then passed and numbered 4 of 1876. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL in the meantime had consulted the Ordinances and said he found it was possible for the winding up and reorganisation of the Company to go on simultaneously. Mr. RYRIE, Mr. KESWICK, and Mr. LOWCOCK then gave notice of their protest against the passing of the Ordinance.
Page 178