McARTHUR CASE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXII, Issue 22250, 26 October 1935, Page 12

McARTHUR CASE

WARRANT FOR ARREST NEW ZEALAND ACTION TRIAL WANTED IN DOMINION ALLEGED FALSE PROSPECTUS By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyright (Received October 5.'25 p.m.) SYDNEY. Oct. 25 In the Sydney Police Court to-day J. W. S. McArthur was charged with inducing people to advance money to the Investment Executive Trust Company, Limited, of New Zealand, by means of a false prospectus which, it was alleged, had been issued in New Zealand in 1933. The prospectus was alleged to have stated that the Investment Executive Trust Company adopted a policy of diversification, or spreading capital over a large number of sound investments, and that this statement had concealed the true nature of the company's investments ; that McArthur, knowing the prospectus to be false, had indicated intent thereby to induce persons to advance money to the company. Documents from Dominion Mr. Richard Windcycr, K.C., for defendant, said it might be necessary to ask for an adjournment for the purpose of obtaining certain documents from New Zealand. "We have written to the Attorney-General and to the Public Trustee in New Zealand and asked for access to Hi esc documents but do not know yet what the answer will he," said counsel. Detective Robinson, of New Zealand, said ho had been instructed recently to arrest McArthur and a warrant was taken out immediately. Ho had executed the warrant to-day. A long argument followed as to the magistrate's power to sign the warrant. Mr. Windeyer contended that the prosecution was vindictive. An Adjournment Granted The magistrate finally admitted the warrant and Detective Robinson asked that McArthur be handed over to his custody for trial in New Zealand. Mr. Windeyer again objected, contending that the papers should be examined in order to test the bona-fides or otherwise of the prosecution. The magistrate said that as no replies had been received from New Zealand to the letters asking for the documents he would adjourn the case until Tuesday. It was not for the defence but for the Crown to establish the bonafides of the prosecution. Bail of £250 was allowed to defendant.