MONEY SENT TO PARIS

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20569, 31 May 1941, Page 5

MONEY SENT TO PARIS

SEQUEL IN COURT ATTEMPT TO HELP GIRL (Per Press Association.) WELLINGTON, this day. The means adopted to send money ,to Paris in a fruitless attempt to help a young New Zealand girl student to flee the country had a sequel in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday with the prosecution of Arthur Geddis, former factory representative for the Radio Corporation of New Zealand, Limited, who was charged with making with intent to deceive a misleading statement in a declaration for the purposes of the finance emergency regulations. The girl, Miss Olga Marks was reported afterwards to be in a concentration camp.

The prosecution said that two years ago Geddes undertook a business trip to England and the United States, returning to New Zealand last December. Shortly after his return he applied for a permit to remit 200 dollars to A. Auriema, New York, to repay a loan he. had incurred there. At first the Reserve Bank refused the application, but Geddis made further representations, reiterating that the money was required to meet expenses incurred during his business trip, and the bank granted the request with “reluctance,” later it transpired that the trug| purpose was to benefit a person in’ occupied territory. Had that been known the bank would not have granted the permit. Interview with Detective

A detective gave evidence in regard to an interview with Geddes, in which Geddes said that Miss Marks was the managing director of his company and while in America he received a request to remit money to her, but he did not have it at his disposal. Auriema informed him that his mother was in Paris, and it was arranged that Auriema should send the money, advancing 200 dollars, with the matter to be treated as a personal one. He did not consider the grounds for the application as given by him to be a misstatement of the position. The Magistrate: Ido not agree. He led the bank to believe that the expense was incurred during a business trip. It is possible that he knew that if he set out the true facts the money would not be obtained.

“If the bank had refused it,” the magistrate said later to Geddes, “you could have thrown yourself on Mr. Nash’s generosity.” (Laughter.) The offence could not be looked on lightly, said the magistrate in imposing a fine of £25. Security to appeal was fixed.