The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1903-03-19
AS TO coNUNDRUMs.


superintendent Cooper tells the Bull
,e,,n that he does not see any conun
arum in the matter Of the shortage o
szzs7s5. the initial responsibility foi
which lies with the present disbursinf
.,.-k q, the Board of Public Works
Let us try and make his vision clearer
Charles wilcox received money to pay
ont for the monthly wage scale OF road
boards. and instead OF using it for that
the law requires, he turned it over
~ he says-to 3. H Wright, who had
no more business with it than he had
Nth the Governors salary. the
money was stolen by some one, and the
sole defence Of it's legal custodian Is
that he made an unlawful deposit of it
with an unauthorized depository.
-conundrum: This being clear case Of
malfeasance in office, why was not
wilcox suspended from duty and his
case reported to the grand jury?
saws the Bulletin: Mr.. Cooper said
to the reporter that the o U held by
Clerk wilcox against payments alleged
70 have been made to Wright was for
= larger amount than the shortage.
but of an earlier date. and that. ac-
cording to wilcox. it was sort of con-
tinuing o U taken for his own pro-
lection
This suggests the conundrum Of
where the interests Of the government
were cared for under system which
permitted clerks to loan public money
to each other on continuing o Us
which were not related to more than
one Of several loans made and were
merely taken for Individual protection
Charles wilcox intimates that he
gave the s2ss7.s5 to B. H. Wright be-
cause Of the directions given by J. II.
Rovd to all clerks in the Department to
obey Mr.. wrights orders as chief clerk
Wright, he claims. asked for the cash
and. in the natural course of business
got it. II this is true why was it neces-
sary for Charles wilcox to take an
o u from Wright for his own pro-
rr-,- ~~,,,,,dr,,ryo fs. Why |
should he have assumed continuing
personal responsibility for public funds
merely passing through his hands. after
his chief had relieved him Of them?
The fourth conundrum is why
Charles wilcox, who confesses an un-
lawful act by which the Treasury has
lost szss7.s5 through somebody's theft,
remains in the employ of the Board Of
Public Works? Is it because his broth
er Robert has friends in the Legisla-
ture7
The explanation is given by supt.
Cooper and Deputy Auditor Mey-
.r. that the road board warrants dated |
In June and July were cashed by VIII
cox at the bank and this cash turned
over TO b. ii. Wright; that later in
the year when the Government was in
funds. the bank cashed the warrants
at the Treasury and they were Endorsed
by the Treasurer as being paid on the
date when presented by the bank.
The House Committee on Expendi-
lures reported yesterday that the ka-
wafhau road board payroll dated July
81. 1902. for $4241O. is covered by war
rant dated Aug. Is, 1902. We quote:
.-This was endorsed by Mr.. Charles
wilcox and drawn by him from the
Treasury. The date of payment by the
Treasury on warrant shows November
Is. 1902, over two months after B. H
wright left the Public Works office.
ii. c. Hapai, Registrar of the Treas
ury. stated to the Senate accountant
and your own that he was willing TO
swear that this warrant was paid to I
Charles wilcox. November IS. 1902"
conuDdrum No. 5.-who invented the !
explanation that the warrant was cash !
ed by the bank and not by wilcox?
An Editor Stricken.