The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1904-12-02
A STORY OF
GRAFT|NC
MahauIu Passes Buck
Up to One Of
the Boyds.

1t may or may not De ulIlcult Ior the
Jury to decide whether stephen Maha-
ulu is guilty or not guilty when the
case goes to them, but his trial has
already established anew the fact made
glaringly obvious I'm the trial Of e. $.
Boyd. That is, that for years public
money in the Department of Pubic
Lands has been regarded as private
booty TO the extent no more and no
less, that the stealings could be Kept
covered-both as to the amounts stolen
and the time of concealment AS time
passed, too, the aggregate of the thefts
increased. When at length exposure
came the spectacle was presented
which continued through the Boyd trial
and is continuing through the Mahauiu
trial of the officials of the foul depart
ment swearing the guilt off upon each
other.
Stephen Mahaulu yesterday afternoon
took the stand in his own behalf, after
an unsuccessful effort of his counsel to
secure a directed verdict of acquittal as
to the heaviest count in his indictment.
His direct evidence was to the effect
that the moneys for which he had given
receints without credits therefor APP
as a matter of fact, been paid into the
Treasury of the Territory and not con-
verted by him to his own or any others
use. but that such moneys nad peeh
credited on the books to other accounts
than those where they belonged 1or
the purpose of covering up FORMER
shortages. The defalcations IN ques-
ton, the defendant testified, were an
those of his superior in office, Il. D.
Boyd, who. according to the defend-
ants testimony, possessed the COM
bination of the safe from first to last
had access to it at all times and, on dit-
ferent occasions, mad taken money
from the safe Moreover, Mahaulu
swore he knew of shortage in the
Office from the time he entered 1t as
clerk In 1898 until he left it as sub
agent a few months ago.
Under cross-examination Mahauiu
acknowledged the entries and receipts
for moneys, made and given by MN
respectively. which belonged to the ac-
counts in which he had testified there
were shortages to cover up which the
moneys for which he was indicted had
been used. He also testified that GER
tain statements he made at an exam
ination in the Attorney Generals once
upon the discovery of the defalcations,
which tended to incriminate Boyd, We're
not true and must have been made py
him in the excitement under when at
that time he was laboring. His cross
examination was still in progress when
the court rose for the day.
MOTION FOR ACQUITTAL.
Mr.. Thompson, before opening for the
defense, moved that the court instruct
the jury to return verdict or not
puilty as to the second count of the in
dictment, relating to $4,000 paid by the
waianae Company. because ID the de-
fendant never received the money. CD
It did not appear that he converted 10
his own use or to others use the said
$45OO, go no demand was made on him.
(4) 1t did not appear that the sum
was not converted by consent of the
owner and (5) there was no evidence
of any money received by the deiend-
ant from the Waianae Company. Mr.
Thompson argued out each point of his
motion.
Mr., Prosser in reply said he did not
care whether the defendant got that
money or not or who cashed the check,
but the prosecution had evidence in de-
fendants own handwriting that he got
5000 which came out of that check ana
could prove intention to embezzle from
the fact that he made the entry of the
5000 before he received the money. on
the point of admissions going TO the
Jury the Deputy Attorney General, on
the authority of the Supreme Court
pir-
cumstances in a criminal case which
the defendant might explain in his own
behalf and he did not choose to eX-
plain them, the fact might go to the
Jury that he declined to explain the
circumstances. 1t was for the jury TO
decide If they believed, beyond rea-
sonable doubt, that Mahsulu received
the money. The prosecution did not
claim embezzlement of the check but of
the money. Mr.. Prosser pointed out
that there We're two receipts numbered
1906 given by Mahaulu one of which
for $45OO was not credited on the books
and the other for $5l6 was credited on
the books.
Mr.. Thompson came again, arguing
that there was still a hiatus. There
was no proof that the money went into
Mahaulu's hands.
Judge Gear suggested the event of
the jury's finding that the money could
not possibly have gone into any other
hands but Mahaulu's.
Mr.. Thompson said If 1t was circum-
stantial evidence all right, let II go TO
the jury, but the jury could not find
evidence that was not there.
Mr.. Prosser said there was evidence
for the jury of Mahaulu's receipt for
s4500 in his own handwriting.
Judge Gear disclaimed the intention
of binding the prosecution down to cir
cumstantial evidence entirely, but said
the court would have to charge the
jury on circumstantial evidence as ad-
mitted. The jury having been called
in, the court denied the motion for q
directed verdict.
Mr.. Thompson then moved that tht
prosecution be forced to elect on which
count of the Indictment 1t would pro.
coed. Mr.. Prosser for reply simply
quoted the statute on that point ant