The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1903-03-07
JAS. H. BOYD
GOES FREE
Prosecution Fails
to Connect the
Checks.
B. II. Wright Refused to
Testify Against
Him.
Judge De Bolt Directs Verdict of
AcquittaI and Other Cases
Are Nolled.

James H. Boyd was acquitted of the
Z two charges of embezzlement yesterday
: morning. Judge De Bolt directing a YER
} dict to that effect, upon the motion of
the defendant, and the remaining two
! indictments were then noile pressed.
} There was no opposition to the instruc-
ton by the prosecution Mr.. Cathcart
) stating that the refusal of Wright to
testify and the testimony of Bcyd's old
messenger left him no other recourse.
! The messenger. Oneha. testified that
} he had often cashed checks for both
Z Wright and Boyd while in the Public
\ Works office. On -examina ton,
} he said he had never cashed a check
than spreckels's. AS the two checks in
} question were drawn on the Bank Of
Hawaii and the Bishop Bank. Boyd Was
exonerated on that phase of the ques-
) ton.
q Haywood Wright was .lext called
end instructed that he need not give
testimony which would tend to incrim-
mate himself
What was your position in the Pub
lie Works office on March IL. 1902"
asked Cathcart.
J 'I refuse to answer" replied the wit
ness.
do you know the defendant James
) H. Boyd?"
) Yes"
II show you check marked Exhibit
A. and check marked Exhibit e. and
ask if you have seen them before?''
II refuse to answer that question"
Mr.. Cathcart asked that the witness
state the ground of his refusal without
giving any explanation, but the court
held that this was not necessary, as the
} witness could be the judge of his own
} testimony.
The defendant propounded no ques-
tions, and f: H. Walker. receiving eel
Ter at Spreckels's Bank was recalled
and over defendants objections testi-
fed that Boyd had deposited 5000 on
, March 20. 1902. and $500 on June 10.
, On cross-examination. WI ness said that
} Boyd often made deposits of large and
small sums.
This ende1 the Territory's case, and
Mr. Robertson moved that the cour-
, direct a verdict of acquittal. CathcarE
Of
the messenger and of the refusal of
, Wright to testify he would not oppose
J the motion. The jury was then called
in and directed to return verdict of
acquittal, c. K. Quinn signing fore
man.
Mr.. Robertson asked, also, as to the
| disposition of the remaining two in
dictments against Boyd. and Cathcart
asked that he be given time to confer
with the Attorney General. Judge De
Bolt stated that the remaining cases
would be called up in the afternoon.
At 100 o'clock, Cathcart asked that
the remaining indictments be nolle
pressed. He said that he had conferred
with the Attorney General, and in view
of the developments of the morning he
did not see any possibility of a convic-
ton Judge De Bolt thereupon dis
charged the defendant on all charges
and his bond was ordered exonerated.
The first case, in which there was
failure to obtain a conviction. was, in
the opinion of Mr.. Cathcart, the strong
est. The second indictment was for the
alleged embezzlement of $50 and $500
| while Boyd was chief clerk, and the
| third indictment was for an alleged
embezzlement of $l7oo on July I. 1899.
while Boyd was assistant clerk in the
Public Works office.