As filed, via EDGAR, with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on January 13,
1999.
                                                               File No.:________
                                                              ICA No.: _________

                                  SCHEDULE 14A
                                 (Rule 14a-101)
                     INFORMATION REQUIRED IN PROXY STATEMENT
                            SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION
                Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the
                         Securities Exchange Act of 1934

   Filed by the registrant |_| 
   Filed by a party other than the registrant |X|
      Check the appropriate box:
|X|   Preliminary proxy statement          |_|   Confidential, for Use of the
                                                 Commission Only (as permitted
                                                 by Rule 14a-6(e)(2))
|_|   Definitive proxy statement
|_|   Definitive additional materials
|_|   Soliciting material pursuant to 
      Rule 14a-11(c) or Rule 14a-12

                          ATLANTIC PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
                (Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

             STEVE H. KANZER, A. JOSEPH RUDICK AND FREDERIC P. ZOTOS
    (Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)

Payment of filing fee (Check the appropriate box):

      |X| No fee required.
      |_| Fee  computed on table below per Exchange  Act Rules  14a-6(i)(1)  and
          0-11.

           (1) Title of each class of securities to which  transaction  applies:
           (2) Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies:
           (3) Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction  computed
               pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11:
           (4) Proposed  maximum  aggregate value of transaction:  
           (5) Total fee paid:

      |_|  Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.

      |_|  Check box if any part of the fee is offset as  provided  by  Exchange
           Act Rule  0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting
           fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration
           statement number, or the form or schedule and the date of its filing.

           (1) Amount previously paid:
           (2) Form, schedule or registration statement no.: 
           (3) Filing party:
           (4) Date filed:



PRELIMINARY COPY --
SUBJECT TO COMPLETION

                                CONSENT STATEMENT
                                       OF
             STEVE H. KANZER, A. JOSEPH RUDICK AND FREDERIC P. ZOTOS
                                       FOR
                          ATLANTIC PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.


        This Consent  Solicitation  Statement (this "Consent Statement") and the
accompanying  form of written consent are furnished by Steve H. Kanzer,  C.P.A.,
Esq., A. Joseph Rudick,  M.D., and Frederic P. Zotos,  Esq.  (collectively,  the
"Solicitors") in connection with their solicitation of written consents from the
holders of common stock,  par value $0.001 per share (the "Common  Stock"),  and
Series A Convertible Preferred Stock, par value $0.001 per share (the "Preferred
Stock";   together   with  the  Common   Stock,   the   "Stock"),   of  Atlantic
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,  a  Delaware  corporation  (the  "Company"),  to take the
following actions without a meeting of the Company's stockholders,  as permitted
by the Delaware General Corporation Law (the "DGCL"):

1.      Remove (i) all current  members of the Company's Board of Directors (the
        "Board of Directors")  other than Steve H. Kanzer and Yuichi Iwaki,  and
        (ii) any  other  person  or  persons  (other  than the  persons  elected
        pursuant to this consent) elected or appointed to the Board of Directors
        prior to the effective time of this stockholder action in addition to or
        in lieu of any of such current members (including any persons elected or
        appointed  in lieu of Steve H.  Kanzer  and  Yuichi  Iwaki)  to fill any
        newly-created  directorship  or  vacancy  on the Board of  Directors  or
        otherwise (the "Director Removal Proposal").

2.      Elect  A.  Joseph  Rudick  and  Frederic  P.  Zotos  (collectively,  the
        "Nominees") as directors of the Company to serve until their  respective
        successors  are duly  elected  and  qualified  (the  "Director  Election
        Proposal").

3.      Amend Section 3.02 of the By-Laws of the Company (the  "By-Laws") to set
        at five the number of members of the Board of Directors (the "Board Size
        Proposal").

4.      Repeal any  By-Laws  adopted  by the Board of  Directors  subsequent  to
        January 12, 1999,  and prior to the  effectiveness  of the Proposals (as
        defined below),  other than the amendment to the By-Laws contemplated by
        this Consent  Statement (the "By-Laws  Proposal";  collectively with the
        Director Removal Proposal, the Director Election Proposal, and the Board
        Size Proposal, the "Proposals").

        Stockholders  of the Company are being asked to express their consent to
the Proposals by MARKING, SIGNING, DATING, and MAILING the enclosed consent form
and returning it promptly in accordance with the instructions set forth below.

        The Solicitors RECOMMEND THAT YOU CONSENT TO EACH OF THE PROPOSALS. This
Consent Statement and the enclosed consent form are first being furnished to the
Company's stockholders on or about January 13, 1999.

                          SUMMARY OF CONSENT PROCEDURE

        The  Proposals  will  become  effective  on the date  when  the  written
consents  of  holders of a majority  of the shares of Stock  outstanding  on the
record date as determined in  accordance  with Delaware law (the "Record  Date")
are delivered to the Company,  so long as each of those consents is delivered to
the Company




within 60 days of the earliest dated consent  delivered to the Company.  Section
213(b) of the DGCL  provides that a  corporation's  board of directors may fix a
record date for a consent  solicitation,  but that the date  selected may not be
more than ten days  after the date upon which the  resolution  fixing the record
date is adopted by the board.  Section  213(b) also  provides  that if the board
does not fix a record  date,  the record  date will be the first date on which a
signed  written  consent  is  delivered  to the  corporation.  Steve  H.  Kanzer
delivered a signed  written  consent to  the  Company  on  January  13,  1999.
Accordingly,  the  Solicitors  believe  that the Record Date will be January 13,
1999, the date Steve H. Kanzer's written consent was received by the Company.

        To the Solicitors' knowledge, there were at the close of business on the
Record Date approximately 4,512,500 shares of Common Stock and 632,468 shares of
Preferred Stock outstanding and entitled to vote. Each holder of Common Stock is
entitled to one vote for each share of Common  Stock held by it as of the Record
Date.  Each holder of Preferred  Stock is entitled to one vote for each share of
Common Stock into which a share of  Preferred  Stock was  convertible  as of the
Record  Date.  As of the  record  date,  the  solicitors  believe  each share of
Preferred Stock is convertible into 3.267 shares of Common Stock.  Consequently,
the  Preferred  Stock was as of the Record  Date  entitled  to an  aggregate  of
2,066,273 votes. The total voting power  represented by the Common Stock and the
Preferred  Stock as of the  Record  Date is  6,578,773,  which  3,289,387  votes
constituting the majority  required for adoption of the Proposals.  Stockholders
may not cumulate votes.

        As of the Record Date, Steve H. Kanzer owned 121 shares of Common Stock,
and  options  exercisable  within  60 days for 4,000  shares  of  Common  Stock,
representing  in  the  aggregate  less  than  1% of  the  voting  power  of  the
outstanding Stock as of the Record Date. As of the Record Date, A. Joseph Rudick
and Frederic P. Zotos held no shares of Stock.

        THE SOLICITORS RECOMMEND THAT YOU CONSENT TO EACH OF THE PROPOSALS.
YOUR CONSENT IS IMPORTANT.  PLEASE MARK, SIGN, AND DATE THE ENCLOSED CONSENT
FORM AND RETURN IT PROMPTLY.  FAILURE TO SIGN AND RETURN YOUR CONSENT WILL
HAVE THE SAME EFFECT AS VOTING AGAINST THE PROPOSALS.

        If your shares are held in your name,  please mark,  sign, date and mail
the enclosed  consent form to A. Joseph Rudick at the address  provided below in
the  postage-paid  envelope  provided.  If your shares are held in the name of a
brokerage firm, bank nominee or other institution, you should contact the person
responsible  for  your  account  and  give  instructions  for the  consent  form
representing  your  shares to be marked,  dated,  signed and  mailed.  Only that
institution  can execute a consent  form with respect to your shares held in the
name of that  institution  and only upon receipt of specific  instructions  from
you.  The  Solicitors  urge you to confirm in writing your  instructions  to the
person  responsible for your account and to provide a copy of those instructions
to A. Joseph  Rudick at the address set forth below so that the  Solicitors  are
aware  of  all  instructions   given  and  can  attempt  to  ensure  that  those
instructions are followed.

        Please return your completed consent form (or institution instructions),
and direct any questions, to A. Joseph Rudick at the following coordinates:

                             A. Joseph Rudick, M.D.
                                  150 Broadway
                                   Suite 1100
                               New York, NY 10038
                            Telephone: (212) 227-4714


                                        2



                      REASONS FOR THE CONSENT SOLICITATION

        The  principal  objective  of the Consent  Solicitation  is to cause the
election of directors who will place a greater  emphasis on the  enhancement  of
stockholder  value and pursue  strategic  alternatives.  The  Solicitors  firmly
believe that the stock performance and market valuation of public  biotechnology
companies in 1998  demonstrates a fundamental  change in the U.S.  biotechnology
industry,  with the  market  placing a  greater  emphasis  on size,  visibility,
enhanced investment liquidity and nearer-term product and profit potential.  The
Solicitors  feel strongly that the Company must adapt to this new environment by
seeking a business  combination  with one or more other  entities,  by acquiring
additional  new  proprietary   medical   technologies  having  near-term  profit
potential, or both.

        A business  combination would potentially  reduce the selling,  general,
and  administrative  expenses of the  Company,  thereby  allowing the Company to
direct a greater  percentage of the Company's working capital towards investment
in the development of proprietary new medical technologies and products.

        The Company could also seek to preserve its working  capital by reducing
selling,  general,  and  administrative  expenses in anticipation of the royalty
income and other  revenues that the Company  anticipates  will be generated upon
the market  introduction  of the  proprietary  new cataract  removal  device and
disposable  instruments  invented and developed by the Company's  majority-owned
subsidiary, Optex Ophthalmics, Inc. and exclusively licensed to Bausch & Lomb.

        The  Solicitors  are of the opinion that the current  Board of Directors
has been  unwilling to recognize  the nature of the current  market and position
the  Company  accordingly.  The  Solicitors  believe  that the  addition  of the
Nominees to the Board of Directors  will enable the Board of Directors to change
course and vigorously pursue enhanced stockholder value.

                                  THE PROPOSALS

        The Solicitors are seeking  written  consents from the holders of shares
of Stock to elect the  Nominees  and adopt the other  Proposals  and to take the
following actions without a stockholders  meeting, as permitted by the DGCL. The
effectiveness of each of the Proposals is subject to, and conditioned  upon, the
adoption  of each of the other  Proposals  by the  holders of record,  as of the
close of business on the Record  Date,  of a majority of the voting power of the
shares of Stock then  outstanding.  If, however,  the By-Laws Proposal is not so
adopted, the Solicitors reserve the right to waive this condition, but only with
respect to the By-Laws Proposal.

Board Removal Proposal

        This proposal  would remove each of the current  members of the Board of
Directors other than the Remaining  Directors (as defined below) and the persons
elected pursuant to this consent. The text of the resolution is as follows:

        RESOLVED,  that (1) each current member of the Board of Directors of the
        Company,  other than Steve H.  Kanzer and Yuichi  Iwaki  (those  current
        members, the "Remaining Directors"), and (2) any other person or persons
        (other than the persons  elected  pursuant to this  consent)  elected or
        appointed  to the  Board  of  Directors  of  the  Company  prior  to the
        effective time of this  resolution,  in addition to or in lieu of any of
        such current members (including any persons elected or appointed in lieu
        of the Remaining  Directors) to fill any newly created  directorship  or
        vacancy on the Board of  Directors  of the  Company,  or  otherwise,  is
        hereby  removed  and the  office  of each  such  member  of the Board of
        Directors of the Company is hereby declared vacant.


                                                  3




        Delaware law provides that directors of the Company may be removed, with
or without  cause,  by the  holders  of a  majority  of the shares of stock then
entitled to vote at an election of the directors. This Proposal would remove all
of the  current  directors  (other  than the  Remaining  Directors)  so that the
Nominees, if elected,  along with the Remaining Directors,  would constitute all
of the members of the Board of Directors.

Director Election Proposal

        This  proposal  would  elect A. Joseph  Rudick and  Frederic P. Zotos as
directors of the Company. The text of the resolution is as follows:

          RESOLVED,  that A.  Joseph  Rudick  and  Frederic  P. Zotos are hereby
          elected as directors of the Company,  to serve until their  respective
          successors are duly elected and qualified.

        The Solicitors seek to replace the current Board of Directors other than
the Remaining  Directors  with the Nominees.  If elected,  the Nominees would be
responsible  for managing the business and affairs of the Company.  The Nominees
understand  that,  as directors of the Company,  each of them has an  obligation
under Delaware law to the scrupulous  observance of his duty of care and duty of
loyalty to the Company and its  stockholders.  The  Solicitors  propose that the
Nominees named above,  once elected,  serve until the next annual meeting of the
stockholders  and until their  successors  have been duly elected and qualified.
Each of the  Nominees  has  consented  to serve as a director  of the Company if
elected. See "Certain Information Regarding the Solicitors and the Nominees" for
more information about the Nominees.

Board Size Proposal

        This proposal would amend Section 3.02 of the By-Laws to set at five the
number of members of the Board of Directors. The text of the resolution amending
the By-Laws is set forth below.

        RESOLVED,  that the  stockholders  hereby  amend the first  sentence  of
        Section 3.02 of the By-Laws to read as follows: "The Board shall consist
        of five members."

        The By-Laws  currently provide that "[t]he Board shall consist of one or
more  members,  the number of which shall be one until changed  thereafter  from
time to time by resolution  of the Board." The Board Size Proposal  would set at
five the number of directors on the Board of Directors.

By-Laws Proposal

        This  proposal  would  repeal each  provision  of any  amendment  to the
By-Laws adopted  subsequent to January 12, 1999, and prior to the  effectiveness
of the Proposals,  other than the amendment to the By-Laws  contemplated by this
Consent  Statement.  This proposal is designed to prevent the existing  Board of
Directors from taking  actions to amend the By-Laws to prevent the  stockholders
from accomplishing the objectives described in this Consent Statement.  The text
of the resolution is set forth below.

        RESOLVED,  that all By-Laws adopted  subsequent to January 12, 1999, and
        prior  to  the  effectiveness  of  this  resolution  (other  than  those
        specifically adopted pursuant to the consent solicitation  undertaken by
        Steve H. Kanzer,  A. Joseph Rudick,  and Frederic P. Zotos) are null and
        void and of no force and effect.

        Section  109 of the DGCL  provides  that "the  power to adopt,  amend or
repeal  bylaws  shall be in the  stockholders  entitled  to vote ...;  provided,
however, any corporation may, in its certificate of incorporation,


                                                  4



confer the power to adopt,  amend or repeal bylaws upon the  directors  .... The
fact that such power has been so  conferred  upon the  directors  ...  shall not
divest the stockholders ... of the power, nor limit their power to adopt,  amend
or repeal  bylaws." The Solicitors  believe that such an  unequivocal  statement
makes it  clear  that the  stockholders  of the  Company  have the  power  under
Delaware law to repeal By-Laws as provided by the By-Laws  Proposal,  whether or
not the By-Laws so amended or  repealed  are known to the  stockholders.  To the
knowledge of the Solicitors, the Delaware courts have not addressed the validity
of a proposal  in the form of the By-Laws  Proposal.  Based upon a review of the
By-Laws on file with the Securities and Exchange  Commission (the  "Commission")
as of January 12, 1999,  the  Solicitors  do not believe that the  invalidity of
this proposal would have an adverse effect on the  stockholders  or this consent
solicitation.   Upon  effectiveness  of  this  proposal,   all  By-Laws  adopted
subsequent  to January 12, 1999,  whether they could be considered as beneficial
or  detrimental  to  the  stockholders,  will  be  repealed.  If  prior  to  the
effectiveness  of the  Proposals  the Board of  Directors  adopts  any  material
amendments to the By-Laws that are relevant to the Proposals, the Solicitors may
forward  additional   solicitation   materials  to  the  Company's  stockholders
regarding those actions.

          CERTAIN INFORMATION REGARDING THE SOLICITORS AND THE NOMINEES

        Set forth below are the name,  age,  present  principal  occupation  and
employment history of each of the Nominees for at least the past five years. The
information  regarding each Nominee has been furnished to the Solicitors by that
Nominee.  Each of the  Nominees  has  consented  to serve as a  director  of the
Company, and is at least 18 years of age.

        A. Joseph Rudick,  M.D., age 41 and a citizen of the United States, is a
founder  of  the  Company  and  two of its  majority-owned  subsidiaries,  Optex
Ophthalmics,  Inc. ("Optex") and Channel  Therapeutics,  Inc.  ("Channel").  Dr.
Rudick is a member of the board of directors of Optex and  Channel.  Dr.  Rudick
served as a business  consultant to the Company from January 1997 until November
1998. From November 1994 until December 1998, Dr. Rudick was a Vice President of
Paramount Capital, Inc.  ("Paramount"),  an investment banking firm specializing
in medical  technology and a previous  placement agent and financial  advisor to
the  Company.   Since  1988,   Dr.  Rudick  has  been  a  Partner  of  Associate
Ophthalmologists  P.C., a private  ophthalmology  practice  located in New York.
Since 1993,  Dr.  Rudick has served as a director of Healthdesk  Corporation,  a
public medical informatics  company.  Dr. Rudick earned a B.A. in Chemistry from
Williams  College in 1979 and an M.D.  from the  University of  Pennsylvania  in
1983.

        Frederic P. Zotos,  Esq., age 33 and a citizen of the United States,  is
an  independent  patent  attorney  and  technology  licensing  consultant.  From
December 1996 until September 1998, Mr. Zotos was Assistant to the President and
Patent Counsel of Competitive Technologies,  Inc., a public technology licensing
agency  located in Fairfield,  Connecticut.  From July 1994 until November 1996,
Mr.  Zotos was a General  Associate  of Pepe &  Hazard,  a private  intellectual
property and corporate law firm located in Hartford,  Connecticut.  Mr. Zotos is
Co-Chair of the Fairfield-Westchester Chapter of the Licensing Executive Society
("LES") and a member of the Valuation  and Taxation  Committee of LES. Mr. Zotos
is a registered  patent  attorney  with the United  States  Patent and Trademark
Office.  Mr. Zotos earned a B.S. in  Mechanical  Engineering  from  Northeastern
University  in  1987  and a joint  J.D.  and  M.B.A.  degree  from  Northeastern
University in 1993.

        Set forth below are the name,  age,  present  principal  occupation  and
employment  history for at least the past five years of the one Solicitor who is
not a Nominee.

        Steve H. Kanzer, C.P.A., Esq, age 34 and a citizen of the United States,
has served as a director  of the  Company  since its  inception  in 1993.  Since
December 1997, Mr. Kanzer has been President, Chief Executive Officer and member
of the board of directors of the Institute for Drug Research, Inc., a private


                                        5



350-employee  pharmaceutical  research and  development  company with offices in
Budapest, Hungary, and New York. From 1992 until December 1998, Mr. Kanzer was a
founder and Senior Managing  Director of Paramount and Senior Managing  Director
and  Head  of  Venture  Capital  of  Paramount  Capital   Investments,   LLC,  a
biotechnology  and  biopharmaceutical  venture capital and merchant banking firm
that is associated with  Paramount.  Mr. Kanzer is a founder and Chairman of the
Board of Discovery Laboratories,  Inc. and a member of the board of directors of
Endorex  Corp.,  two  publicly-traded  pharmaceutical  research and  development
companies.  From 1993 until June 1998,  Mr. Kanzer was a founder and a member of
the  board of  directors  of  Boston  Life  Sciences,  Inc.,  a  publicly-traded
pharmaceutical  research and development  company.  Mr. Kanzer is also a founder
and  member  of the  board of  directors  and has been a  Chairman  and  Interim
President of several private pharmaceutical  research and development companies.
Prior to joining Paramount,  Mr. Kanzer was an attorney associated with Skadden,
Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP in New York from September 1988 to October 1991.
Mr. Kanzer received his J.D. from New York University  School of Law in 1988 and
a B.B.A. in Accounting from Baruch College in 1985.

Certain Relationships

        A. Joseph Rudick,  M.D. is a founder and serves as a member of the board
of  directors  of  two of  the  Company's  majority  owned  subsidiaries,  Optex
Ophthalmics,  Inc.  ("Optex") and Channel  Therapeutics,  Inc.  ("Channel").  In
connection with the establishment of such companies,  Dr. Rudick received 30,000
shares of Optex stock and 40,000 shares of Channel  stock.  In 1996, the Company
issued to Dr.  Rudick  30,000  shares of Common Stock in exchange for the 40,000
shares of Channel held by Dr.  Rudick;  in 1998, Dr. Rudick sold those shares of
Common Stock on the open market.  From January  1996 until  November  1998,  Dr.
Rudick  was a  business  consultant  to the  Company  pursuant  to a  Consulting
Agreement  entered  into between Dr.  Rudick and the Company  under the terms of
which Dr. Rudick received  $2,500 per month.  From 1995 until December 1998, Dr.
Rudick was a Vice President of Paramount.

        Prior  to  a  private  financing  consummated  in  September  1995,  the
Company's  operations  had been financed  primarily  through  loans  provided by
Lindsay A. Rosenwald,  M.D., a principal  stockholder and former director of the
Company, and VentureTek,  L.P.  ("VentureTek"),  a principal  stockholder of the
Company.  The principal  amount of such loans that had been advanced  during the
period from July 25, 1993 to June 30, 1995,  together with the interest  thereon
through June 30,  1995,  was  $1,085,027  to Dr.  Rosenwald  and  $1,357,277  to
VentureTek, L.P. (such indebtedness, including accrued interest through June 30,
1995, is collectively  referred to as the "Stockholder  Loans"). On December 31,
1995,  Stockholder Loans  aggregating  $2,442,304 in principal and interest were
converted into an aggregate of 785,234 shares of the Company's Common Stock.

        In addition to the Stockholder Loans,  VentureTek provided a loan to the
Company  in July 1995 in an  aggregate  principal  amount of  $125,000,  bearing
interest at the rate of 10% annually. This loan, together with $115,011 interest
accrued on such loan and on the  Stockholder  Loans (from July 1, 1995 until the
conversion thereof into shares of Common Stock), was repaid on January 15, 1996,
from the proceeds of the Company's initial public offering.

        Joseph Stevens & Co., Inc. ("Joseph Stevens"),  a principal  stockholder
of the Company, was the underwriter in the Company's initial public offering. In
connection  with the initial  public  offering,  Joseph  Stevens and the Company
entered into an Underwriting  Agreement.  In connection with a bridge  financing
that occurred shortly before the initial public  offering,  Joseph Stevens acted
as  placement  agent  and  received  fees and  expenses  totaling  $195,000.  In
addition,  the Company  granted Joseph  Stevens,  for nominal  consideration,  a
warrant (the "Joseph  Stevens  Warrant")  exercisable for 165,000 units (each, a
"Unit"), the security issued by the Company in its initial public offering, each
Unit consisting of one share of Common Stock and a


                                        6



redeemable warrant exercisable for one share of Common Stock. The Joseph Stevens
Warrant is exercisable until December 13, 2000 at an exercise price of $6.60 per
Unit.  In  addition,  the Company and Joseph  Stevens  entered  into a Financial
Advisory and Consulting  Agreement and related Indemnity  Agreement  pursuant to
which the Company paid Joseph Stevens a monthly  consulting fee of $2,000 (which
obligation  terminated  on December 18,  1997) and agreed to pay Joseph  Stevens
additional  consideration  in the event  Joseph  Stevens  assists the Company in
connection with certain financing or strategic transactions.

        On April 15,  1996 the  Company  entered  into a letter  agreement  with
Paramount.  Dr.  Rosenwald is the  President,  Chairman and sole  stockholder of
Paramount,  and employs  Michael  Weiss,  Esq.,  the  Secretary  of the Company.
Pursuant to such letter agreement, Paramount agreed to render financial advisory
services to the Company and the Company agreed to compensate  Paramount for such
services by paying  Paramount a retainer of $5,000 per month,  issuing a warrant
to Paramount's  designee to purchase 25,000 shares of the Company's Common Stock
at an  exercise  price of  $10.00  per  share and  paying  Paramount  additional
consideration  in the event  Paramount  assisted the Company in connection  with
certain financing or strategic transactions. Pursuant to the terms of the letter
agreement, (1) upon the renewal of the term of the letter agreement, the Company
issued a warrant to Paramount's  designee  exercisable  for 25,000 shares of the
Company's  Common  Stock  at an  exercise  price  of  $8.05  and  (2)  upon  the
consummation of a financing  transaction,  the Company paid $76,438 to Paramount
and issued a warrant to Paramount's  designee  exercisable  for 12,500 shares of
the Company's  Common Stock at an exercise price of $6.73 per share. The term of
the letter  agreement has expired.  From February 1992 until  December 1998, Mr.
Kanzer, a director of the Company, was a Senior Managing Director of Paramount.

        On June 24, 1996, the Company,  Paramount and a second financial advisor
(Paramount and the second financial advisor are collectively  referred to as the
"Financial  Advisor") entered into a Financial  Services  Agreement  pursuant to
which  the  Financial  Advisor  agreed to render  financial  advisory  services.
Pursuant to the  agreement,  the Company  paid the  Financial  Advisor a $30,000
retainer and agreed to pay additional  consideration  in the event the Financial
Advisor  assisted the Company in connection with certain  financing or strategic
transactions.  The  term of  this  Financial  Services  Agreement  has  expired,
although the Company may be obligated  to pay fees to the  Financial  Advisor in
the event certain financing or strategic  transactions are consummated  pursuant
to the terms of the Financial Services Agreement.

        Effective  February 26, 1997,  the Company and Paramount  entered into a
letter of intent  whereby  Paramount  agreed to act as  placement  agent for the
Company in  connection  with the private  placement  of Series A Preferred  (the
"Private  Placement").  Thereafter,  the Company  entered into an agreement (the
"Placement  Agreement") with Paramount,  pursuant to which the Company agreed to
pay  Paramount,  for  its  services,  compensation  in  the  form  of  (i)  cash
commissions  equal to 9% of the  gross  proceeds  from the sale of the  Series A
Preferred  issued in the Private  Placement and (ii) a  non-accountable  expense
allowance  equal to 4% of the  gross  proceeds  from  the  sale of the  Series A
Preferred.  In addition, upon the final closing date of the sale of the Series A
Preferred,  the Company sold to Paramount  and/or its designees,  for $0.001 per
warrant,  warrants  exercisable  for an aggregate of 123,720  shares of Series A
Preferred, at an exercise price of $11.00 per share of Series A Preferred.  Such
warrants  are  exercisable  for  10  years  and  contain  certain   antidilution
provisions.  Under the Placement Agreement,  the Company has agreed to indemnify
Paramount  against  certain   liabilities,   including   liabilities  under  the
Securities Act.

        In connection with the Private  Placement,  the Company has committed to
enter into an advisory  agreement  (the  "Placement  Advisory  Agreement")  with
Paramount  pursuant to which  Paramount will act as the Company's  non-exclusive
financial advisor. Such engagement provides that Paramount receive (i) a monthly
retainer  of $4,000  commencing  June 1, 1997 (with a minimum  engagement  of 24
months),  (ii)  out-of-pocket  expenses  incurred in  connection  with  services
performed under the Placement Advisory


                                        7




Agreement and (iii)  standard  success fees in the event  Paramount  assists the
Company  in  connection  with  certain  financing  and  strategic  transactions.
Paramount has agreed that, in the event it is entitled to compensation under the
letter agreement dated April 15, 1996 or the Financial  Services Agreement dated
June 24, 1996, each described above, and the Placement  Advisory  Agreement,  it
will seek payment under only one of the agreements.

        Except as set forth in this Consent Statement,  to the best knowledge of
the  Solicitors,  none of the  Solicitors  or  Nominees  (i) owns  beneficially,
directly or indirectly  any securities of the Company,  (ii) owns  beneficially,
directly  or  indirectly  any  securities  of any  parent or  subsidiary  of the
Company,   (iii)  owns  any   securities  of  the  Company  of  record  but  not
beneficially,  (iv) has purchased or sold any  securities of the Company  within
the past two years,  (v) has incurred  indebtedness for the purpose of acquiring
or holding securities of the Company, (vi) is or has within the past year been a
party  to  any  contract,  arrangement  or  understanding  with  respect  to any
securities  of the  Company,  (vii) since the  beginning of the  Company's  last
fiscal  year has been  indebted  to the  Company or any of its  subsidiaries  in
excess of $60,000 or (viii) has any arrangement or understanding with respect to
future  employment by the Company or with respect to any future  transactions to
which the Company or any of its affiliates  will or may be a party. In addition,
to the best  knowledge  of the  Solicitors,  except as set forth in this Consent
Statement or in Annex A, since the beginning of the Company's  last fiscal year,
none of the  Solicitors  or Nominees  has had or is to have a direct or indirect
material interest in any transaction or proposed transaction with the Company in
which the amount involved exceeds $60,000.

        Except as set forth in this Consent Statement,  to the best knowledge of
the Solicitors,  none of the Nominees, since the beginning of the Company's last
fiscal year, has been affiliated  with (i) any entity that made or received,  or
during the Company's  current fiscal year proposes to make or receive,  payments
to or from the Company or its subsidiaries for property or services in excess of
5% of either the Company's or such entity's  consolidated gross revenues for its
last  full  fiscal  year,  or (ii)  any  entity  to  which  the  Company  or its
subsidiaries  was indebted at the end of the Company's  last full fiscal year in
an aggregate amount exceeding 5% of the Company's total  consolidated  assets at
the end of such year. Except as set forth in this Consent Statement, none of the
Nominees is or during the Company's  last fiscal year has been  affiliated  with
any law or  investment  banking  firm that has  performed or proposes to perform
services for the Company.

        To the best knowledge of the Solicitors, except for Optex and Channel in
the case of Dr. Rudick,  none of the corporations or organizations in which each
of the Nominees has  conducted his  principal  occupation  or  employment  was a
parent,  subsidiary or other affiliate of the Company,  and no Nominee holds any
position  or office  with the  Company or has any family  relationship  with any
executive  officer  or  director  of the  Company  or has been  involved  in any
proceedings,  legal or  otherwise,  of the type  required to be disclosed by the
rules governing this solicitation.

                        CERTAIN EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSALS

        Set forth  below is a  description  of  certain  provisions  of  certain
agreements  to which the Company is a party which may be  implicated as a result
of the adoption of certain of the  Proposals.  This  description is qualified in
its  entirety by  reference  to those  agreements,  which have been filed by the
Company with the Commission.  Other documents or arrangements  applicable to the
Company  not  available  to or not  reviewed  by the  Solicitors  may affect the
matters  described  below or may be affected by the matters  contemplated by the
Consent Statement.




                                        8



Stock Options

        The  Company's   1995  Stock  Option  Plan  provides  that  "[t]he  Plan
Administrator  shall have the  discretion  ... to (i) provide for the  automatic
acceleration  of one or more  outstanding  options ... upon the  occurrence of a
Change in Control or (ii)  condition any such option  acceleration  ... upon the
subsequent Involuntary  Termination of the Optionee's service within a specified
period following the effective date of such Change in Control.

        "Change in Control" is defined in the  Appendix of the 1995 Stock Option
Plan to include the following:

        a change in the  composition  of the Board  over a period of  thirty-six
        (36)  consecutive  months  or less  such  that a  majority  of the Board
        members ceases,  by reason of one or more contested  elections for Board
        membership,  to be  comprised  of  individuals  who either (A) have been
        Board  members  continuously  since the  beginning of such period or (B)
        have been elected or nominated for election as Board members during such
        period by at least a majority of the Board  members  described in clause
        (A) who  were  still in  office  at the time  the  Board  approved  such
        election or nomination.

        Upon  approval of the  Proposals  the  Nominees  will not  constitute  a
majority of the Board. The remaining members of the current Board will have been
members  continuously  during the past 36 consecutive  months.  Accordingly,  it
would appear that approval of the Proposals would not cause a Change of Control.


                              THE CONSENT PROCEDURE

        Section  228 of the DGCL states  that,  unless  otherwise  provided in a
corporation's certificate of incorporation,  any action that may be taken at any
annual or  special  meeting  of  stockholders  may be taken  without a  meeting,
without prior notice,  and without a vote if consents in writing,  setting forth
the action so taken,  are signed by the holders of outstanding  stock having not
less than the minimum  number of votes that would be  necessary  to authorize or
take such action at a meeting at which all shares  entitled to vote thereon were
present and voted,  and those  consents  are  delivered  to the  corporation  by
delivery to its registered  office in Delaware,  its principal place of business
or an officer or agent of the  corporation  having  custody of the book in which
proceedings  of  meetings  of  stockholders  are  recorded.  In the case of this
consent solicitation,  written,  unrevoked consents of the holders of a majority
of the  outstanding  shares of Stock as of the Record Date must be  delivered to
the Company as  described  above to effect the actions as to which  consents are
being  solicited  hereunder.  Section 228 of the DGCL further  provides  that no
written  consent  shall be effective to take the  corporate  action  referred to
therein  unless,  within 60 days of the earliest dated consent  delivered in the
manner required by Section 228, written  consents signed by a sufficient  number
of holders to take such action are  delivered to the  corporation  in the manner
required by Section 228.

        THE SOLICITORS  CURRENTLY  INTEND TO CEASE THE  SOLICITATION OF CONSENTS
ONCE THEY HAVE  DETERMINED  THAT VALID AND  UNREVOKED  CONSENTS  REPRESENTING  A
MAJORITY OF THE VOTING POWER  REPRESENTED  BY ISSUED AND  OUTSTANDING  SHARES OF
STOCK AS OF THE RECORD DATE HAVE BEEN OBTAINED AND TO DELIVER THOSE  CONSENTS TO
THE  COMPANY  IN THE  MANNER  REQUIRED  BY  SECTION  228 OF THE  DGCL AS SOON AS
PRACTICABLE  THEREAFTER.  WHEN THE PROPOSALS FOR WHICH CONSENTS ARE GIVEN BECOME
EFFECTIVE, A STOCKHOLDER WILL BE UNABLE TO REVOKE HIS OR HER CONSENT.


                                        9



        If the actions  described herein are taken, the Company will as required
by the DGCL  promptly  notify the  stockholders  who have not  consented  to the
actions taken.

        Consents may only be executed by  stockholders of record at the close of
business on the Record  Date.  To the best  knowledge of the  Solicitors,  as of
January 12, 1999,  there were  outstanding  4,512,500 shares of Common Stock and
632,468  shares  of  Preferred  Stock.  Given  that  the  Solicitors  own in the
aggregate  shares  accounting for less than 1% of the voting power of the Stock,
consents of  stockholders  owning  approximately  50% of the voting power of the
outstanding  shares of Stock  other than those  owned by the  Solicitors  on the
Record Date are still required to adopt the Proposals. Since the Solicitors must
receive consents from the holders of a majority of the voting power  represented
by the Company's  outstanding shares in order for the Proposals to be adopted, a
broker  non-vote or direction to withhold  authority to vote on the consent form
will  have the same  effect  as a "no"  vote  with  respect  to the  Solicitors'
solicitation.

Consent Form Special Instructions

        If you were a record  holder as of the close of  business  on the Record
Date, you may elect to consent to,  withhold  consent or abstain with respect to
each Proposal by marking the "CONSENT," "WITHHOLD CONSENT," or "ABSTAIN" box, as
applicable,  underneath EACH such Proposal on the accompanying  consent form and
signing, dating and returning it promptly in the enclosed postage-paid envelope.
The consent form will be voted in accordance with the stockholder's  instruction
on such consent form. As to the  Proposals  set forth herein,  stockholders  may
consent to an individual  Proposal or may withhold  their consent by marking the
proper box in the  consent  form.  If the  enclosed  consent  form is signed and
returned  and no  direction  is  given,  it will be voted in favor of all of the
Proposals and if the consent form is signed and returned and not dated,  it will
be dated on or about the date it is received.

        IF ANY  STOCKHOLDER  WHO HAS  EXECUTED AND RETURNED THE CONSENT FORM HAS
FAILED TO CHECK A BOX MARKED "CONSENT," "WITHHOLD CONSENT," OR "ABSTAIN" FOR ANY
OR ALL OF THE PROPOSALS,  THAT STOCKHOLDER'S CONSENT CARD WILL BE VOTED IN FAVOR
OF THAT PROPOSAL OR THOSE PROPOSALS.

        THE SOLICITORS RECOMMEND THAT YOU CONSENT TO EACH OF THE PROPOSALS. YOUR
CONSENT IS IMPORTANT.  PLEASE MARK, SIGN AND DATE THE ENCLOSED  CONSENT FORM AND
RETURN IT  PROMPTLY  IN THE  ENCLOSED  POSTAGE-PAID  ENVELOPE TO THE ADDRESS SET
FORTH UNDER "SUMMARY OF CONSENT  PROCEDURE." FAILURE TO RETURN YOUR CONSENT WILL
HAVE THE SAME EFFECT AS WITHHOLDING CONSENT TO THE PROPOSALS.

        If your shares are held in the name of a brokerage firm, bank nominee or
other  institution,  you should contact the person  responsible for your account
and give  instructions  for the  consent  form  representing  your  shares to be
marked,  dated,  signed and mailed.  Only that institution can execute a consent
form with  respect to your shares held in the name of the  institution  and only
upon  receipt of specific  instructions  from you.  The  Solicitors  urge you to
confirm in writing your instructions to the person  responsible for your account
and to provide a copy of those  instructions  to A. Joseph Rudick at the address
set forth under "Summary of Consent  Procedure" so that the Solicitors are aware
of all instructions  given and can attempt to ensure that such  instructions are
followed.

        BROKER NON-VOTES, ABSTENTIONS OR FAILURE TO RETURN A SIGNED CONSENT WILL
HAVE THE SAME EFFECT AS  WITHHOLDING  CONSENT TO THE  PROPOSALS.  THE SOLICITORS
URGE EACH STOCKHOLDER TO ENSURE THAT THE RECORD HOLDER OF HIS OR


                                       10



HER SHARES  MARKS,  SIGNS,  DATES AND  RETURNS THE  ENCLOSED  CONSENT AS SOON AS
POSSIBLE.

     CERTAIN OTHER INFORMATION REGARDING THE COMPANY; STOCKHOLDER PROPOSALS

        Stockholders  are  referred to the  Company's  Proxy  Statement  for the
Annual Meeting of Stockholders held on May 11, 1998 (the "1998 Proxy Statement")
with respect to the  compensation  and  remuneration  paid and payable and other
information  related  to  the  Company's  officers  and  directors  and  to  the
beneficial  ownership  of the  Company's  securities.  The 1998 Proxy  Statement
stated that the deadline for  stockholders to submit  proposals for inclusion in
the Company's proxy  statement for the 1999 Annual Meeting of  Stockholders  was
expected to be December 12, 1998.

                                APPRAISAL RIGHTS

        Stockholders  of the Company are not  entitled  to  appraisal  rights in
connection with the adoption of the Proposals.

                    REVOCATION; COSTS OF CONSENT SOLICITATION

        A consent  executed by a  stockholder  may be revoked at any time before
its exercise by submitting  (i) a written,  dated  revocation of such consent or
(ii) a later dated consent  covering the same shares. A revocation may be in any
written form validly  signed by the record  holder as long as it clearly  states
that the consent  previously  given is no longer  effective and must be executed
and  delivered  prior to the time that the  action  authorized  by the  executed
consent is taken.  The  revocation  may be  delivered to A. Joseph  Rudick,  150
Broadway,  Suite 1100, New York, NY 10038.  Although a revocation or later dated
consent  delivered  only to the Company will be effective to revoke a previously
executed  consent,  the  Solicitors  request that if a revocation or later dated
consent is  delivered to the Company,  a photocopy  of the  revocation  or later
dated consent also be delivered to the A. Joseph Rudick at the address set forth
above, so that the Solicitors are aware of that revocation.

        The  purpose  of the  Proposals  being  made by the  Solicitors  in this
Consent  Statement  is  to  advance  the  interests  of  all  of  the  Company's
stockholders.   Therefore,   the  Solicitors  believe  that  their  expenses  in
connection  with the consent  solicitation  should be reimbursed by the Company.
The cost of the  solicitation  of consents to the  Proposals  will be  initially
borne by the Solicitors.  The Solicitors  intend to seek  reimbursement of their
expenses from the Company if the Nominees are elected to the Board of Directors.
This request will not be submitted to a stockholder  vote.  Costs related to the
solicitation of consents to the Proposals include expenditures for attorneys and
postage and are expected to aggregate  approximately  $40,000.  The actual costs
and expenses could be materially different than the estimate set for above, and,
in particular,  could be  substantially  higher if for any reason  litigation is
instituted in connection with the matters related to this Consent Statement.


                                       11



        YOUR CONSENT IS IMPORTANT.  NO MATTER HOW MANY OR HOW FEW SHARES YOU
OWN, PLEASE CONSENT TO THE PROPOSALS BY MARKING, SIGN, DATING, AND MAILING
THE ENCLOSED CONSENT FORM PROMPTLY.


                                                                 STEVE H. KANZER
                                                                A. JOSEPH RUDICK
                                                               FREDERIC P. ZOTOS

                                                                JANUARY 13, 1999


                                       12



                                                                         ANNEX 1

                               SHARE OWNERSHIP OF
                          ATLANTIC PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
                       AS REPORTED IN THE PROXY STATEMENT
                    FOR THE ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS OF
                          ATLANTIC PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
                              HELD ON MAY 11, 1998


        The following table sets forth certain  information  with respect to the
beneficial  ownership of Common  Stock as of March 16, 1998,  by (1) all persons
who were  reported to be beneficial  owners of 5% or more of Common  Stock,  (2)
directors  and certain  executive  officers of the Company and (c) all directors
and executive officers as a group, as reported in the 1998 Proxy Statement.

        This  information  is qualified in its entirety by reference to the 1998
Proxy Statement.  The Solicitors make no  representations  as to the accuracy of
this  information.  Moreover,  because changes in beneficial  ownership may have
occurred since the effective dates of the filings cited below, this information,
even if accurate as of the time of filing, may no longer be valid.

                                              NUMBER OF  PERCENT OF TOTAL SHARES
NAME AND ADDRESS                                SHARES          OUTSTANDING(1)

Lindsay A. Rosenwald, M.D.(2) .....................  445,462        13.30%
  787 7th Avenue
  New York, NY 10019

VentureTek, L.P.(3) ................................ 438,493         12.94%
  39 Broadway
  New York, NY 10006

Joseph Stevens & Co. Inc.(4) ....................... 330,000          9.74%
  33 Maiden Lane, 8th floor
  New York, NY 10038

Mellon Bank Corporation ............................ 280,000          8.27%
  One Mellon Bank Center
  Pittsburgh, PA 15258

Jon D. Lindjord(5).................................. 130,000          3.84%

Stephen R. Miller, M.D.(5)..........................  77,480          2.29%

John K.A. Prendergast, Ph.D.(6).....................  71,656          2.12%

Margaret A. Schalk(5)...............................  64,570          1.91%

Yuichi Iwaki, M.D., Ph.D.(5)........................  42,000          1.24%







Shimshon Mizrachi(5)................................  30,000             *

Robert A. Fildes, Ph.D.(5)..........................  10,000             *

Paul D. Rubin, M.D.(5)..............................  10,000             *

Steve H. Kanzer, Esq.(7)............................   4,121             *

All current executive officers and directors as a 
  group (9 persons)(5-7)............................ 439,827           12.98%


- ------------------------

 *  Less than 1.0%

(1)     Percentage of  beneficial  ownership is  calculated  assuming  3,387,751
        shares of Common Stock were  outstanding  on March 16, 1998.  Beneficial
        ownership is determined in accordance  with the rules of the  Commission
        and  includes  voting and  investment  power  with  respect to shares of
        Common Stock.

(2)     Includes 570 shares owned by Dr. Rosenwald's wife and trusts in favor of
        his minor children. Dr. Rosenwald disclaims beneficial ownership of such
        shares. Does not include 86 shares collectively owned by Dr. Rosenwald's
        mother and two brothers,  of which Dr.  Rosenwald  disclaims  beneficial
        ownership.  Includes  380  shares  owned by two  companies  of which Dr.
        Rosenwald is the sole  stockholder.  Includes  100,068  shares of Common
        Stock into which  shares of Series A  Preferred  may be  converted  upon
        exercise of a warrant, exercisable within 60 days of March 16, 1998, for
        47,202 shares of Series A Preferred.

(3)     The general partner of VentureTek,  L.P. is Mr. C. David  Selengut.  Mr.
        Selengut may be  considered  a  beneficial  owner of the shares owned by
        VentureTek,  L.P. by virtue of his authority as general  partner to vote
        and/or   dispose  of  such  shares.   VentureTek,   L.P.  is  a  limited
        partnership, the limited partners of which include Dr. Rosenwald's wife,
        children,  sisters  of Dr.  Rosenwald's  wife  and  their  husbands  and
        children. Dr. Rosenwald disclaims beneficial ownership of such shares.

(4)     Represents  shares of Common  Stock  underlying  a warrant,  exercisable
        within  60 days of March  16,  1998,  for  shares  of  Common  Stock and
        securities convertible into Common Stock.

(5)     Represents options exercisable within 60 days of March 16, 1998.

(6)     Includes 53 shares of Common  Stock held in trust for the benefit of the
        children  of  Dr.  Prendergast.  Dr.  Prendergast  disclaims  beneficial
        ownership  of such  shares.  Includes  34,000  shares  of  Common  Stock
        underlying  options  exercisable  within  60 days  of  March  16,  1998.
        Includes 37,500 shares of Common Stock underlying a warrant  exercisable
        within 60 days of March 16, 1998.

(7)     Includes 4,000 shares underlying  options  exercisable within 60 days of
        March 16, 1998.



                                        2



PRELIMINARY COPY --                                                      ANNEX 2
SUBJECT TO COMPLETION

                          ATLANTIC PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

               CONSENT OF STOCKHOLDER TO ACTION WITHOUT A MEETING


                          THIS CONSENT IS SOLICITED BY
                       STEVE H. KANZER, A. JOSEPH RUDICK,
                    AND FREDERIC P. ZOTOS (THE "SOLICITORS")


        Unless otherwise  indicated  below,  the  undersigned,  a stockholder on
January 13, 1999 (the "Record  Date"),  of Atlantic Pharmaceuticals, Inc.  (the
"Company"),  hereby consents, pursuant to Section 228 of the General Corporation
Law of the State of Delaware,  with respect to all shares of Common  Stock,  par
value  $0.001  per share,  of the  Company  (the  "Common  Stock")  and Series A
Convertible  Preferred  Stock,  par value $0.001 per share,  of the Company (the
"Preferred Stock," and together with the Common Stock, the "Stock"), held by the
undersigned,  to each of the following actions without a meeting,  without prior
notice and without a vote.


        THE SOLICITORS STRONGLY RECOMMEND THAT YOU CONSENT TO THE
FOLLOWING RESOLUTIONS.


        1.  RESOLVED,  that (1) each current member of the Board of Directors of
the Company, other than Steve H. Kanzer and Yuichi Iwaki (those current members,
the "Remaining Directors"),  and (2) any other person or persons (other than the
persons elected  pursuant to this consent)  elected or appointed to the Board of
Directors of the Company  prior to the  effective  time of this  resolution,  in
addition to or in lieu of any of such  current  members  (including  any persons
elected  or  appointed  in lieu of the  Remaining  Directors)  to fill any newly
created  directorship  or vacancy on the Board of Directors  of the Company,  or
otherwise,  is hereby removed and the office of each such member of the Board of
Directors is hereby declared vacant.

        |_|   CONSENT         |_|   WITHHOLD CONSENT        |_|   ABSTAIN

        2.  RESOLVED,  that A.  Joseph  Rudick and  Frederic P. Zotos are hereby
elected as directors of the Company, to serve until their respective  successors
are duly elected and qualified.

        |_|   CONSENT         |_|   WITHHOLD CONSENT        |_|   ABSTAIN


        3. RESOLVED,  that the  stockholders  hereby amend the first sentence of
Section 3.02 of the By-Laws to read as follows:  "The Board of  Directors  shall
consist of five members."

        |_|   CONSENT         |_|   WITHHOLD CONSENT        |_|   ABSTAIN




        4. RESOLVED,  that all By-Laws  adopted  subsequent to January 12, 1999,
and prior to the effectiveness of this resolution (other than those specifically
adopted pursuant to the consent  solicitation  undertaken by A. Steve H. Kanzer,
A. Joseph  Rudick,  and Frederic P. Zotos) are null and void and of no force and
effect.

        |_|   CONSENT         |_|   WITHHOLD CONSENT        |_|   ABSTAIN

        To consent, withhold consent or abstain from consenting to the Proposals
set forth above,  check the  appropriate  boxes above. If no box is marked above
with respect to any Proposal,  the undersigned  will be deemed to have consented
to that Proposal.

- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ONLY  COMPLETE  THIS BOX IF YOU WISH  THIS  CONSENT  TO APPLY TO FEWER  THAN ALL
SHARES YOU OWN OF RECORD. Please contact the Solicitors if you are unsure of the
number of shares you hold.

- --------------------------------             -----------------------------------
No. shares of Common Stock voted             No. shares of Preferred Stock voted

- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                       Dated:______________________, 1999


                      -----------------------------------
                                  (Signature)

                      -----------------------------------
                      (Title or authority, if applicable)


                      -----------------------------------
                         (Signature if held jointly)


PLEASE  SIGN  EXACTLY  AS  NAME  APPEARS  ON THIS  CONSENT.  If the  shares  are
registered in more than one name, the signature of each person in whose name the
shares  are  registered  is  required.  A  corporation  should  sign in its full
corporate  name,  with  a duly  authorized  officer  signing  on  behalf  of the
corporation and stating his or her title. Trustees,  guardians,  executors,  and
administrators  should sign in their official capacity,  giving their full title
as such. A partnership  should sign in its partnership  name, with an authorized
person  signing on behalf of the  partnership.  This Consent  serves to vote all
shares to which the signatory is entitled.

PLEASE DATE, SIGN AND MAIL THE CONSENT PROMPTLY, USING THE ENCLOSED
ENVELOPE.



                                        2