Ka Leo o ka Lahui, Volume II, Number 175, 20 April 1891 — Justtice and Equality. [ARTICLE]

Justtice and Equality.

Editor -Ka Leo* 1 wish to eail your attention to a few mis-statements of fact and argument contairied in Thursday*s English article headed " Justiee and Equality vs, Oolor and Partv." As to facts: you siate that Mr. Gat, a foreigner, took the plaee of Mr. Hart, a native. Mr. Oat is Hawaiian born; and unless you are unwiiling to be bound by your own argument, his being a white mah does not operate against hinj. Therefore it is evident on your own shQwing, that the difference in salary was the measure ©f diflference in ability, at least in the opinion of the Post Master Genera/, who is himself Hawaiian born. 2 In case, hig first appointment to government position was as Secretary of the Board of Health, an oflice then fairly goina; having been voluntarily vacated by Mr. G. W. C| Jones, an almost life-long of the Kingdom, who is interinarried with the native and m<)st p<>|>uiar ; with and consid«-rate of the rijrht» of Hawaiians. K:s (Potter's) later appoinlmeni on his 4< resignatioa from the Bnard of Heallli ean in tv> way t»c charged U Mr. I>is:»oi>. who has been ab?e?it in uiv M2onths fr<un the king«lōm. It

is well known that Mr. Bnnth. thg Secretarv of i-he lioaid, a Hawaiian born, nnd a epeeial friend to the native pēoole in realitv made the appomtment. Strangely enough, however, you forget to mention that Mr. Potter ;% resigned" frem the Bd, of Heaith, by order. specially to make room for a hative. 3 Mr. Eva«s brobably {,resigned" just as Mr. Potter did—to make room for a nativo Hawaiian; or perhaps because he was getting t©o mueh monthly for the service. At any rate, it was not because he "carried a gun" in '87 that he received the appointment, as he was not even a member of the League. 4 Neither was Mr. Carter * a member of the League. But he was a vsry enthusiastic inember of the National Reform Partv, if all accounts be true. 5 Among the chief immediate causes of the revoiution were sotne of the bitter r;<ce articles pi:blished in the Elele, then owned by Mr. Gibson, who, bring taxed with it, enplained (and this is a notorious fact) that Mr. Test;i wrote them and h.od them pnblished without his kndw r ledge or consent.„ In such case would it he your poiicy, Mr. E4itor, to retain that gentlemen in a govarnmentr office, with conditions changed mak,ing your party a successful revolution party ? Now, as to mferences: īf what I have said is correct in fact your conclusior.s are all groundless. ; And when you advocate the principles that the present ministry should make from the politieal Pai whic|} they are supposed to represent fand this party principle is admitted and acted upon everywhere bnt i in Hawaiil. you inoek the bottom fr(im your arguments in reappointment bv the revolution eabinet, even if thev had ciade a ■'elean sweep," and appointed to every oflice stannch political adherent. But as a matter of faot, that cabinet did nothing of the kind As every one knows, they kept manyjofthe most rabid adherents of thp o!d regime in important and lucrative offices and to that extent «ntirely ignored the political services of those bv whose efforts they had acquired p©wer. In fact their conduct in that resDect 89 alienated a great number of th£ reformers of 1887 as to i make the national reform party i possible in 1889-90 i The fact is Mr. Editor, you have mistaken a few official acts of the present and late ministiies as cause& whieh sbould be rather attributed to «nr wretched politieal svstem, whieh makes government by a party practicailv impossible, and rcduces it to a mat* ter of pure personal favoritism. The rcvolutionary cabinet was indeed tbe only one for many years phieh represented anybody or anything from a political standpoint, being the unanimous ehoiee at the time of appointment, of the dominant political party, as was by the succeeding election rcturn|s of torty-seven <»ut of fiftyeight nu'tn!>ers of the Legislature to support them: and t!ie .snbso(|U'*nt opposition deve!opcd cven iu tha <īrst s<ssion of that w.:s in great meabv tiio r?rti«nl of the c:ibinet; to aft upon llie sa:ue party j

principtes whieh ym\ Mr. Kciitor. ;u«w aay sbould he fe)lowed hy the presentcabinet. Articie 41 <jf the constitut Iwhieh was intended by the"framers thereof to pravide for the cabinet representing the majority has entireiy.! failed in practise. fOnce dismiss&d (or resigned), the appointment is the ahsdlute prerogature of the sovereign. Two ;several times 'new .cabinets have henn appointed since the fall of ithe revolutioiiary eahin»t; nnd ;on both occassions the ohjocts |Songht by the constitntion \vere |entirely ignote<l—the appointing power being iexercised pifreJy in !the direction of pereon«l favoritism [go far as; not interfere(] with :by outside or i 44 black-stairs" c.oereion] without |the slightfst rogard ;to elaim or frona a polHieal i>artv stanjdpoint. The re.?uit ,is that whereas, before the revo!lution, we had one autocrat, we !now have f.«mr eaeh supreme in ihis own sph3re: and dotninant ;party is ntteijly power!ess for a ;term of two years between s. ss:sions of thc Legislature. ■ Even ilhen, a vote of ;want of confidenee !is likely to be (as it has been) pre;vented bv a fear that a bad eabinet may be succeeded by a :jwofse. : , Bnt £t this is another stor3%" and ;itis proposed; to say now on!v !this: that until the Hawaiiau politician becomes more. or less than human. the existing sy»«?tem must fee changed before the majority ean be fairlv represented, or we ean expecf. the unchecked action of four i pretty antocrats to ;result in the g?eatest good to *he greatest number. Bystasder.