SWEEPSTAKES ABROAD

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21466, 13 April 1933, Page 14

SWEEPSTAKES ABROAD

POSITION OF COMPANY FALSE PRETENCES AUEGED SALES BROKER CHARGED [by telegraph—OWN correspondent] WELLINGTON,' Wednesday False pretences in connection with business transactions of Concessions, Limited, a Wellington company formed with the object of obtaining sweepstake concessions in foreign countries, wore alleged in the Magistrate's Court to-day when Ernest Matthieu Finlayson, organising sales broker for tho company, was charged with obtaining £25 from John Edgar Wade by false pretences. In evidence Wade, a manufacturer in business in Auckland, said ho first met accused in Auckland, in October, 1932. Accused told him lie war? sales manager for Concessions, Limited. The company, he said, was formed in Wellington, and its objects were to obtain concessions from foreign countries to conduct sweepstakes. He said that tho original Irish sweepstake organisation had sold its interests to an English syndicate, which was to control the sales organisation for that sweepstake. It was explained, continued witness, that tho English representative of the syndicate was in Wellington making arrangements for the sale of concessions and that an arrangement with Concessions, Limited, had been completed. It was also stated by accused that Concessions, Limited, had procured a concession from the Egyptian Government to conduct sweepstakes, the first event to be on the June Oaks in 1933. The purchase price of bonds in Concessions, Limited, which were nominally of £1 each, was to be 255, 20s of which was to be lodged with a bank in the names of the trustees for the bondholders. and the interest earned on fixed deposits was to bo used to conduct an art union of a perpetual naturo for the bondholders. Purchase of 20 Bonds The company, witness said he was told, had made arrangements with an art union organisation known as the "Golden Casket" in Brisbane, and .the first drawing was to take place on February 28, 1933. Accused said tho company had appointed him to proceed to Brisbane in time to supervise this drawing. Li addition, the company had appointed him to proceed to Cairo and generally to supervise the company's interests in the drawing of big sweepstakes. During the interview accused produced a deed of trust which purported to be between Concessions, Limited, on the one hand, and Dr. Wright and Professor Gould on the other. These men were represented to be trustees for the bondholders. Witness said he was very much impressed with the proposal, and also with the sales organiser. On his studying tho deed of trust, supported by the knowledge that concessions had already been purchased, tho success of the company seemed to be undoubted. Witness purchased 20 bonds at a cost of £25, and accused gave him a receipt for the money. Witness produced the deed of trust and the receipt. Shortly after purchasing the bonds it came under witness' notice that there had been published a disclaimer by two trustees indicating that they had no knowledge of the company, and that they had never signed any trust deed. Witness saw another disclaimer published, signed H. S. Bilby, stating that ho had not witnessed signatures to the deed of trust. Inquiry Regarding Money After seoing the disclaimers, continued witness, jio saw accused. He endeavoured to find out all he could about the operations of the company, but the answers were not satisfactory. Ho telegraphed to Concessions, Limited, concerning the money ho had paid over and asking for reply he received a telegram to "the effect, that nothing had been received' by Concessions, Limited, and suggesting that witness should stop the cheque. Cross-examined by counsel for accused, witness said that there was no mention in the deed of trust that concessions had already been obtained. Counsel: Did you buy those shares on what was said in the deed, or on what was said by Finlayson? Witness: When I first met Finlayson he casually dropped on my desk a bundle of his correspondence, the top letter being addressed to himself under the style of J.P.—-justice of the p eacc I very naturally assumed that justices of the peace had been selected for their honour and worth and that I could safely place myself in the. hands of such a one and get a perfectly just deal. Formation o! the Company William J. Moore, merchant, of Wellington, said that in July, 1932, he decided to form a company known as Concessions, Limited. It was registered as a private company. The main objects of the company were to purchase concessions overseas, and the capital of £IOO was divided into one hundred £1 shares. Accused was later appointed organising sales broker. Up to the time accused went on the road no arrangements had been made for the purchase of concessions. If accused made representations v'hich Wade said ho had made ho would bo saying something that was not right. Accused had not accounted for the money which Wade said he had paid. Leslie Duncan Ayson said that when Concessions, Limited, was formed ho held one'share in it. Ho did not have anything to do with tho formation of tho company. If accused had made representations alleged by Wado ho had not done so on his instructions. Richard Roland Gould, clerk, said that at ono time ho was attached to an agency, and in that way ho became acquainted with Moore, who engaged him to draw up tho memorandum of association in respect of the formation of Concessions, Limited. Witness said that he had not instructed the accused to name any of tho representations ho was alleged to have made. Accused, who pleaded not guilty, was committed to the Supreme Court for trial.