The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1908-05-10
CATHCART AND
DUVAUCHELLE
NOLLE PROS.
The County Attorneys Attempt to Shift Re-
sponsbiity and Condemn Advertisers Story
Brings Out the Facts From Sheriff Iaukea.
WHAT CATHCART SAYS.

Editor Advertiser-In an editorial in
this mornings Advertiser, you make
the following statements:
"A few weeks later one of the de-
tectives was thought guilty of graft.
This was Eugene Duvauehelle. The
Sheriff Investigated the case and ar
rested his own man, who was later in
dicted by the grand jury. What was
done nv the County Attorney IN his
case? What punishment was meted out
to Duvauchelle to act as warning to
others in the force who might be
tempted? Nothing. During the prelim-
mary investigation of the case the
County ATTORNEY advised even against
his arrest or the making public any OF
the facts of the graft, and when the
arrest was made in spite of this the
case was nol-prossed
The statements that the County At
torney advised against Duvauchelle s
arrest. or the making public of any of
the facts of the graft, are each false
and untrue.
From information furnished to the
Sheriff about year ago, Chlnaman
named Tai Hun was arrested for gross
cheat; at his trial before the District
Magistrate, Judge Whitney, the de-
fendant was discharged, and the Mag
istrate stated from the bench, substan-
: tially, that. according to the evidence.
Duvauehelle should be in the prisoners
dock charged with accepting a bribe,
and that he was surprised that the
police had not arrested DuSauchelle in
stead of Tai Hun. Upon hearing of
the matter. I proceeded to take steps
to prosecute Duvauehelle, but learned
that Mr.. Taylor considered that / was
preiudiced against Duvauchelle and
against the police department, and
feared that Duvauchelle and the de-
partment would not get square deal
at my nands. Accordingly, desiring to
give no occasion for criticism, / went
TO the then Attorney-General, Mr..
Peters, explained the circumstances,
and requested him to take in hand the
investigation of Duvauehelle. This ne
agreed to do, and did DO. and | then
had nothing further to do with the
case. An indictment was found by the
grand jury, and on that indictment
Duvauchelie was arrested. When / took
charge of the entire prosecution in the
September term, the case against Du-
vauehelle. among others, was turned
over to me. | investi gated it. and for
two months used every endeavor to get
testimony that would warrant the case
being triea, but was unable to get any
testimony that would corroborate the
statement of the Chinaman, who claim
ed to have given Duvauchelle the bribe
of few dollars, and l decided that
L could not ask a jury TO convict on
such HncOrroborated evidence. There
upon l nolled the case in open court
before Judge Lindsay, and stated what
! deemed TO be sufficient reasons for
nolling it.
Duvauchelle was at one time a po-
lice officer under Sheriff Brown, and,
afterwards, was employed by your
paper to obtain evidence of gambling
being carried on in Honolulu; when
MIR. iaukea took office, he was appoint
ed one of the detectives: at the time
SSdhe District Magistrate said that Du-
vauchelle should be charged with ae-
ceptlng a bribe and | first took hold
OF the matter the Sheriff supended
Duvauchelle, pending the result of the
charge or investigation. The Sheriff
did not then arrest Duvauehelle or /,
swear out a warrant against him, but |
he was at liberty until the Attorney |
general resented the indictment found j
by the grand jury.
Such is a concise statement of the !
facts, which could have been readily /
aseertained by inquiry.
| ask You TO publish this communica- |
tion. and retract as publicly as you
have made the unfounded and injurious
statements in the editorial contained. |
Very truly yours.
a
May s, 1908.