EXCHANGE DEAL

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23770, 25 September 1940, Page 5

EXCHANGE DEAL

MAGISTRATE'S FINDINGBREACH OF REGULATIONS FINES OF £lO IMPOSED [BY TELEGRAPH —PRESS ASSOCIATION*] WELLINGTON, Tueisclay Holding that a breach of the Finance Emergency llegulations, 1940, liatl been committed, Mr. A. M. Goulding, S.M., in a reserved judgment delivered in tho Magistrate's Court to-day, convicted two Wellington men. Robert lan Malcolm Sutherland, solicitor, and Norman John Suckling, manufacturer's representative. The defendants were jointly charged that, without lawful excuse and without a permit from the Minister of Finance, they made a payment in New Zealand in consideration for receiving a 'payment outside New Zealand. On this charge each defendant was fined £lO, with costs. Tho defendants were also jointly charged with being parties to a transaction involving the conversion of New Zealand money into sterling currency at a rate of exchange other than the current rate, and with dealing with money payable outside New Zealand as a consideration for receiving payment in New Zealand. On these charges they were convicted and ordered to pay costs. A further charge prefenred against Suckling aldne, of sending money out of New Zealand without the permission of tho Minister of Finance, ~was dismissed. "Suckling had not a permit, and could not be a party to any transaction which would ultimately end in his becoming possessed of money to send abroad," said the magistrate. "Suckling knew the regulations. Ho bought exchange and knew it became his property. Nor do I think Sutherland's reliance on any assurance from a bank that the transactions were not a breach of regulations is of any avail. "I think these men allowed themselves to be parties to a transaction which they, like Mr. Micawber, hoped would turn out for the best. Their hopes have not been fulfilled, and the veil of innocence under which they now seek cover appears to have no more substance than that which covered the charming Mr. Skimpole. As to the charge against Suckling alone of sending money out of New Zealand, I agree with counsel that tlie evidence does not go far enough to establish the charge laid. The prosecution does not press for heavy penalties. Nevertheless, the offences cannot be regarded lightly, and more than a; nominal penalty must be imposed."