TRADE WITH THE ENEMY

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2364, 21 January 1915, Page 6

TRADE WITH THE ENEMY

i ■... a 'i' - VIA ROTTERDAM CASE AGAINST DDEREOP COMMITTED FOR TRIAL A conclusion was reached yesterday in connection with the hearing of the case in whioh Henrick Wilhelm Magnus Duerkop, of the firm of Duerkop and Mackay, merchants, of was charged with having traded with a firm in an enemy country. There are fivo charges against Duerkop of supplying, or attempting to supply, certain consignments to Gustav J. J. Witt, of Rotterdam, knowing they were destined for Germany. Mr. D. G. A. Cooper, S.M., was on the Bench. Mr. H. H. Ostler appeared for the Crown, and Mr. T. Neave for accused. Mr. Ostler continued his cross-exam-ination of accused, and inquired that as witness had written to another European firm stating that he could not send goods to Rotterdam, as it was illegal, why did ha not writo the same to Witt. Witness replied that he did not think it necessary. Witt knew already the goods were on their way to Rotterdam. "A Slip of the Pen." Mr. Ostler produced a letter written to Witt, in which Duerkop referred to the Sevdlitz consignment l in the following terms:—"After the final sale of the Seydlitz cargo on its final arrival in Hamburg, etc." "If you did not know that the goods were to finallv arrive in Hamburg," said Mr. Ostler, referring to this, "how do you account for the worcta 'on their final arrival at Hamburg ? Witness': It was a mistake. The Magistrate: A slip of the penP Witness: A slip of the pen—yes. • Mr. Ostler, quoted further from the same communication, and finally' said: —"Do you seriously repeat what you said at the previous hearing, that after hearing the contents of this letter you did not intend the goods to ultimately arrive in Germany? Witness: It was not my special intention that they should go to Germany. Mr. Ostler: That is not answering the question. ' Witness: It never occurred to me the goods would reach Hamburg. Duerkop's Intentions, To Mr. Neave, witness said that the private letters to Mr. Witt just read by Mr. Ostler were written purely with an intention to secure help from Witt in respect to the Rotterdam' firm. "I believe Witt was there at the time," said witness. Mr. Neave then proceeded to read a letter written by Duerkop ten dayß after the outbreak of war'to a person in New Zealand interested in Duerfeop's firm. "An Order-in-Council," stated the letter, -"prohibits anyone doing any commercial transaction whatever for or with and on behalf of the enemy. . . . All kinds of legal difficulties have arisen, and we aro now spending much ol our time with lawyers to ward off responsibilities for. purchasing contonts made here before the war, with sellers who, insist upon us taking delivery whilst we have lost our markets. . . Asthe London outlets for our goods, which are not foodstuffs, and consequently do not profit by an increased demand,. has_ also partly been upset through Continental tanners having to closo down, the English markets are no good to us either, and may remain unsatisfactory for some time to- come. Meanwhile wo are using any spare time to find contracts in America." . "This shows a clear recognition," commented Mr. Neave, "that Duerkop realised all trade with' Gemany had ceased." Witness further added that he had not written a single line to Hamburg with a view to getting his goods there. Further Address for the Defence. This concluded the hearing of evidence, and after it had been read to accused, Mr. Neave said there was not sufficient in the evidence to warrant accused being sent on to tho Supreme Court.. One of the functions of a Magistrate in this respect was to see that the charge was a well-founded.ono, and this was not. The whole thing was narr.owcdidown to this: Did the Maghv trate believe what Duerkop had said in his evidence? If ho did, then Duerkop should not go to the higher Court. Counsel 6trossed.the honesty of defendant in voluntarily laying open to the Crown his private letters; The Crown had closed its case when Duerkop had volunteered this information about his private letters. This act was on a par with the whole of defendant's conduct, which was, one of unimpeachable honesty; The Crown had attained its objective by the publicity given to this case. Ho did not criticise the Crown for taking the action, but now that there had been a searching and thorough inquiry which had disclosed nothing illegal, the case should be dismissed. The Magistrate's Decision. The Magistrate said that he was of the opinion that defendant had given his evidence very honestly. "But there is ono thing, and I think it is the point," said the Magistrate, "and that is whether defendant knew that • the casings he shipped to this Dutch firm Would go to Germany. He knew that the capital and manager of the company were German, and I can't help thinking that he knew that these casings shipped would have gone on to Germany. lam certain that he consulted Mr. Algle, and he thought he would bo doing all right by sending thorn to Rotterdam. However, there is a prima facie case that he was trading with a firm that was really a branch of an enemy's firm. It is not for me to make any comment on the case, but that briefly is my decision." Duerkop then entered a plea of. not guilty, and was committed to the Supreme Court for trial. On tho application of Mr. Neave, bail was allowed as before. Duerkop then left for Somes Island in the company of his guard.