FINANCIAL DEAL.

Auckland Star, Volume LXXI, Issue LXXI, 14 September 1940, Page 6

FINANCIAL DEAL.

BREACHES ALLEGED. CONVERSION OF CURRENCY. WELLINGTON,' Friday. Breaches of tho Finance Emergency Regulations were alleged against Robert lan Malcolm Sutherland, solicitor, and Norman John Suckling, manufacturers' representative. They were jointly charged in the Magistrate's Court to!day with being parties to a transaction involving the conversion of New Zealand currency into sterling currcncy at a rate of exchange other than the current rate, with making a payment in New Zealand as a consideration for receiving a payment outsido New Zealand, and with dealing with money payable outside New Zealand as a consideration for receiving a payment in New Zealand.

Suckling was charged alone with sending money out of New Zealand without the permission of the Minister of Finance. Both pleaded not guilty. Part of their defence wa? that the informations did not disclose any statutory offence. The charges were heard together.

It was stated for the Crown that the facts wero that a Mr. S. J. Haydon, who went to live in California because of his 'wife's health, was given permission by the Rcservo Bank to transmit to San Francisco £1000 in February and six amounts of £100 each in April, June, August, October, Xovembcr and December. Sutherland was attorney in Njw Zealand for Haydon, and on April 30 was informed by the Union Bank that it was the last day on which the April permit was available. Having no funds Available in Haydon's account, he arranged an illegal transaction with Suckling, whereby Suckling paid £10S for the £100, which was equivalent to £80 sterling.

Sutherland banked the £108 to Ilavdon's credit and endorsed the draft with the signature of Haydon. It was dispatched by Suckling to his principals in Yorkshire, Suckling asking that fSO sterling bo placcd to his credit in England. Case For Defence. Giving evidence, Sutherland said Haydon mentioned before leaving New Zealand that he had a friend in Suckling's oflicc, and lio was pleased to have a connection with Suckling, ae the lattcrV principals overseas might be useful to liim in his endeavours to begin business in America on his own account. Sutherland said he banked the £108 given him by Suckling to Ilaydon's credit in a trust account, e-ndorsed the draft and gave it to Suckling. He did not know the terms of the arrangement between Haydon and Suckling's office about the money. His principal concern on April 30, when all transactions except the handing over of tho draft took place, was that he might miss collecting the April permit on liis client's behalf.

Answering Sir. Biss, for the Crown, Sutherland said that on April 30 he did not hold enough money of Ilaydon's to pay for the April permit. In participating in this transaction he assumed that some arrangement had been made between Haydon, Suckling and Firths (Suckling's Yorkshire principals) whereby Firths might be taking money on Kaydon's behalf, acting perhaps as his bankers. He thought tho draft was going to England for Haydon for his benefit.

Suckling, in evidence, said he wna aware that outgoing letters were dealt with by the censor. The draft was sent out in the mail in the ordinary straightforward way, and he was greatly surprised wheu informed it had been held

up. To Mr. Biss, Suckling said he realised the regulations of April 10 would stop hia buying of sterling, lie mentioned tho regulations to Sutherland, whose reply was ho was getting a draft from a trading bank and it obviously must have tho authority of the Reserve Bank. Suckling eaid he did not tlicn know Haydon's permit had been issued months previously. To Mr. Pope, who appeared for Suckling himself, Suckling said he understood any arrangements made before tile April regulations could legally be completed. Public Interest*. After evidence and legal argument had been submitted, tho magistrate said he considered eases of this nature of considerable importance and interest to the commercial community and the public generally. He therefore proposed to reserve his decision. Mr. H. H. Biss, who conductcd the case for the Crown, said, near the end of the hearing, that the police understood thi<j to bo the first prosecution of its kind in New Zealand, and had brought the case for the purpose of making the regulations more public. The police were not pressing for a heavy penalty, but wanted it to be "brought before the public. He understood that breaches of these regulations wero regarded seriously.—(Press Assn.)