The Hawaiian gazette., 1903-02-27
As A
WITNESS
EVidenceD0es Not
Harm B. n.
Wright.
(From Thursdays Daily)

|
II there is a failure to show that B.
II. Wright was not public account
ant and not charged with the collection
OF public monies, the theory Of the de-
fence in the first of the embezzlement
cases will probably be that w. H.
Wright, the missing Treasurer Of the
Territory, is responsible for the thefts
charged to the chief clerk. The jury in
the Wright case was secured the first
thing in the morning and there was a
technical fight all day long, as to the
responsibilities of the chief clerk in the
matter of collecting monies for the Ter
ritory. The defendant claims that he
Is not public accountant, and as en-
beZZlement Is a statutory offense he
cannot be convicted of taking money
which he was not entitled to receive.
Judge De Bolt was inclined to favor the
argument of the defendant on the prop
osition that he was not legally re-
sponsible as a public accountant, but
there was no direct ruling, and the
question will probably not be settled I'M
til it is submitted in a motion to direct
a verdict to acquit after the Territory
has put in all of its evidence.
Jas. II. Boyd was the first witness for
the prosecution and his testimony was
objected to on the ground that he was
an "accomplice." The objection was
overruled and he was allowed to take
the stand though there were continued
objections to the evidence offered by
him. However his testimony was not
unfavorable to the defendant and there
was no cross-examination of him by
Mr.. Dunno. Boyds attorney, F. E.
Thompson, was present in court during
all the hearings, and is watching the
case closely
Boyd testified that he had appointed
b. H. Wright as chief clerk, but this
was stricken out, but the court allowed
the commissions to be introduced,
Dunno, who produced them, stating
that he did admit their legality.
Objection was made to testimony re-
lating to the regulations under which
Wright acted as chief clerk. Dunno
claimed that the law provided for ap-
poinrment of public accountants in a
certain way, and that Wright had not
been so designated. He argued that the
office was a statutory one. and that
under the law regulation was insult
ficiert in supporting a charge Of en-
bezzlement. The court sustained the
of the office. He allowed Boyd how
ever to testify as to what he had in
formed Wright concerning his duties.
WAS there a combination to the
safe," asked Cathcart, after Boyd had
told him that Wright had charge of
J the office.
/ Yes, Mr.. Wright had the combina-
/, ton, also the key to the inner door.
There was only one key that l had
, knowledge of, and / turned it over to
J Mr.. Wright as chief clerk in June, when
, turned over the cash and books. !
told him to change the combination ]
had, and put in one of his own. l don't
know whether he did or not / placed
duplicate combination of the safe with
the Treasurer, just prior to my leaving
the Territory. 1t was on September End.
1902, that l left for San Francisco. and
l left control of the Public Works Office
J with Treasurer Wright"
, Hes gone too" remarked Davis
"And he had the combination for q
: month";" meaningly added Dunno.
In the afternoon there was more ar
gument as to the position OF Wright,
Dunno claiming that he had only the
duties prescribed by law, and the col
lection of money was not one of them
Cathcart replied that the law provided
J that the Superintendent of Public
Works fix the duties and the court stat
ed that it could not be presumed that
,, the chief clerk had no duties.
Boyd was allowed to testify that he
had told Wright that he was to have
complete charge of the books OF the
department, was to receive all monies
and was to account for them to the
hxy
, Audit act.
Mr.. Boyd.
, Charles siemsen, cashier in the Public
Works Office, was next called and testi-
fed that he was under the orders OF
Wright. and had been told that he
would be discharged II he didn't obey
orders. He identified various books OF
stubs, which showed money collected by
u him in the Public Works office and
: turned over to Wright as chief clerk
r Manuel Cook. bookkeeper in the sams
q office. related the circumstances lead
ing up 10 the suspension OF Wright by
y Treasurer Wright. He testified tina
: after Boyd left, Treasurer Wright sen
e for II, III, Wright, but he would no
= come and finally he was suspended.
y Witness related also the meeting II
e the Public Works Office at which wer'
present Is. II. Wright, Deputy Audito
Meyers, Attorney General Dole, W. III
q Wright Carlos Long and sheriff Brown
u Al that time the safe was closed an'
y sealed and when the seal was broken
10 Wright. the defendant, was asked q
omen The safe, He tried 10 do Il an'
failed. then said he had forgotten IN
combination, Defendant telephoned 4
IL Carlos Long Who came up ana defend
ant then opened the safe The cas-
i. tray Was taken out and the money pu
\. on the table when silneHs was told 4
10 so a. Hawaiian Electric 40, when b
"A returned ha gave a memorandum 4
,p TREASURER wriEhi ana then Dole ask
a, "a what herame - this money, bui dc