The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1907-03-07

A remittance of over two thousand
dollars for William III. Wright, pre-
sumably the former Treasurer of Ha-
wall who disappeared on September "a
1902, leaving a shortage in his ct \
of 17,949.91, reached Honolulu a
month ago. The defaleation was in
what was known as the Chinese fund,
kept separate from other moneys In
the Territorial treasury.
Wright had admitted the shortage
to Secretary II. E. Cooper the day
before and made an appointment to
meet him at o'clock next morning
to make some arrangement about restI-
tuition. AS he failed to keep the APP
pointment Mr.. Cooper requested the
high sheriff to keep lookout for him.
The steamer Alameda, leaving for San
Francisco that afternoon, was searched
for Wright but he could not be found
and has not been seen IN Honolulu
or the Territory since.
Reports that Wright was in one place
or another, across the sea, have at
different times been published. The
latest one appeared in the Advertiser
last June, saying he had been located
at Cananea copper mine in Mexico.
Now that money is being sent here
for him, perhaps he is not far away.
There is $2266.ao held by Bishop &
Co., bankers, belonging to William 81.
Wright, supposed to be the absconded
Treasurer of Hawaii, as revealed I'M
der garnishee process in the suit of
John Wilson against William H. Wright
and Healthie K Wright and in the
suit of Territory of Hawaii by A. j.
Campbell, Treasurer, against William
IL Wright.
s. NJ. Damon, Alexander CARVE and
A. w. T. Bottomley, copartners in
Bishop & Co., in partly identical an
swers to the two suits as garnishees,
were indebted to the defendant VIII
liam III. Wright and further that on
that date they had any money. goods
or effects in their possession belonging
to the defendants or either of them,
but they say:
THAT on the 7th day of February.
1907, they received from the Perpetual
Trustee Co, Ltd, of Sydney, n. S. W.,
Commonwealth of Australia, under
cover of letter from the said COM
pany, the sum of f4S1:4:1 sterling
(s2327.S5) with Instructions from the
said company to these garnishees to
deliver the same, less their costs, COM
missions and charges (as the agents
of the said company to one William
II. Wright upon satisfactory proof of
the identity of the said William II.
Wright; that the costs, commissions
and charges of these garnishees
amount to the sum of s61.65, and that
these garnishees had at the time SER
vice of summons was made upon them
in the above cause, and now have, in
their possession as agents of the said
Perpetual Trustee Co., Ltd, the sum
of $2266-20, which they were on the It'll
day of February, 1907, prepared to
hand over to William H. Wright on
proof of his identity; that these gar
nishees are ignorant as to whether
the said William II. Wright named as
defendant in the above cause is the
person entitled to receive the said sum
of $780, 0.''
Bishop Trust Co., Ltd, composed of
the same persons, answers in both
cases that it neither had at time of
service nor has now in it's possession
any money, goods or effects of the de-
PENDANTS or either of them.
Wilson's case is numbered Law
6567" and is therefore in priority to the
Territory's numbered Law 6571.h AS.
however, his claim is but $1,000 on a
promissory note with interest, his
winning would leave about a thousand
dollars for the Territory to recover
if il can.
Wilson is a nonresident but must
have some sort of a line on Wright,
when he had his suit brought just in
the nick of time to catch the remit
lance from Australia. 1t was Wilson'S
suit that started Treasurer Campbell on
the track of the money.
But where is Wright?
How comes it that money is sent
here for him, to be delivered to him
upon satisfactory proof of his iden-
tity?
Does anybody here hold his power
OF attorney to collect the money and
remit it to him?
These are questions.