Ka Leo o ka Lahui, Volume II, Number 190, 11 May 1891 — Page 4

KA LEO O KA LAHUI.

"E Mau ke Ea o ka Aina i ka Pono."

 

KA LEO

MONDAY, MAY 11, 1891

NOTICE.

 

Copies of the KA LEO o KA LAHUI can be found every morning at both the News Agencies in town. Price 5 cents a copy.

 

HAWAIIAN RELATIONS WITH THE UNITED STATES.

 

            Saturday last gave us the rare treat of a genuine attempt at an editorial in the antiquated and fossil organ of our Reform Party, i.e., the party which is fast beginning to mean only the ring of capitalists and land-grabbers representing the American speculative influence, and comprising these narrow-minded men who want to subjugate Hawaii to the United States, whether we gain or loose by it.

            It appears that the LEO’s utterances on Pearl River, instead of being taken in a business-like manner, have aroused the alarm of those keen patriots who, ignoring our side of the question, view the annexation of these islands to the United States, only in the light of dollars they may reap thereby, and consider it already as a fact, not as a possibility. Therefore the San Francisco agents of the patriotic and speculative ring have sent orders to the “P.C. Advertiser,” to wake up on the matter. But the poor old lady, who did not dare pick up the subject when the LEO first did, cannot now find any argument of her own, and is obliged to build on the very text and words of her San Francisco correspondent. It is true, she goes thus far, that “little children and some other people should not play with edged tools”….but that just fits the “Advertiser and its American ring, for it is they who are playing with the edged tools, which can cut both ways. As for Hawaii “having made her bed and having to lie in it, “that is all bosh and nonsense. If the bed does no longer continue to be comfortable, it is our duty to seek another one, and there is no “foolishness” in advocating that idea as we did and will continue to do, here and abroad, and our position has been found sound except perhaps in the opinion of that ring who have made fortunes in California, on our sugars, through the protection of the United States, and who now fear losing their sweet and gile monopoly.

            But we shall never tire of repeating that America has broken faith with us in matter of the McKinley Bill versus our Reciprocity Treaty, and the only point we agree in with the “Advertiser,” is that we must look out to try to better our circumstances, although not by childishly sticking to the old state of things or to broken alliances, not by merely trying to obtain “some possible modifications to the United States tariff,” etc., but, on the contrary, by boldly studying the possibilities of new markets.

            Of course, if we cannot find any new outlet then we shall have to “lie” in our “bed;” but, if we can discover or obtain by proper diplomacy, other and better markets, or any one as good, or even any inferior one in which our losses would be less than the present one. We may just as act on the suggestion “to abandon the American market entirely.” – none of our planters would object to that if the cash balance was on their side, - and in that case, who would suffer from the change, but the commerce of the United States and not ours? Mr. Blaine may very well say that “he will not stand any foolishness and discrimination” against American pretentions and exclusiveness, but with all his talent, he must condescend to consider the question as we do here, under shape of some very suggestive figures:

            We exported last year to the United States, about 242,161,000 pounds of sugar, (valued before the new tariff, at about $13,000,0000) 9,669,000 pounds of rice [valued $451,000], some bananas, wool, hides, tallow, coffee, etc. [aggregate value 259,643], making an exact total of $13,810,070, the great bulk of which is sugar.

            In exchange, what we imported from the United States, free of duty by treaty, was to the value of 3,162,000 only, which are not affected by tariff changes.

            Now, supposing that the production for export and the wants for imports remain the same, 242,000,000lbs. of sugars exported this year will bring in only $7,500,000, thus giving us a lost of 5,750,000, outside of the possible fluctuation of commercial values, - a very bad “bed” indeed!

            But if, by going to another market, we can obtain, as it seems possible, for our sugars, the same or nearly the same amount as we did get from America before the tariff, thus avoiding this loss of over five million, could we not afford to “abandon the American market entirely,” for the sugar, without fear of any “suspensive clause” retaliation, or even at the expense of paying American duties on our rice, bananas, and other minor produce if we could not also sell those advantageously elsewhere? Whist, on the other hand, if we could not obtan our imports any cheaper from elsewhere, (an open question) could we not afford to continue importing those three millions of merchandise from the States, which would furnish our home government a new revenue of ten percent or more, to be paid by the merchants on the American side? The question is therefore not one of threats and menace, but simply a calm study of facts and figures. Can we or not, get better markets, better price, in Canada, New Zealand or Australia, for out staple produce?    

            If so, Mr. Blaine and the “advertiser” ring had better consider on what side the “foolishness” will be, and see whether the larger portion of the “disastrous consequence” will not be on the other side?

            We have no personal interest in the matter further than the patriotic desire to help our country, and we wish a calm elucidation of all the aspects of the question. In the meanwhile, the first point of our position remains intact: “No treaty, no cession of Pearl Harbor!”

            That @ the LEO is appreciated abroad, and is recognized an authority among both Hawaiians and foreigners. Our increasing list of cash subscribers echoes, yes.

 

The Power of the People.

 

            The power and influence of the people in political affairs depends upon the directness of its application. In a pure democracy where the people themselves assemble and decide all questions arising, the influence of the people is applied direct and their power is complete. But when delegates are elected by voters to transact the business of state there is a new factor introduced that may greatly modify or entirely defeat the measures which the people really desire. When these delegates elect others and so on the power of the people is so filtered out as to entirely disappear. In the United States for example, the people choose delegates to a primary convention, the convention chooses candidates, now the people vote for one of the candidates, we will say for the legislature. The legislature elects two senators. The local postmaster is appointed by the postmaster-general, who was nominated by the president and approved by the senate. It will be see how very remote and round-about is the influence of the people in choosing their village postmaster. We do not have space to trace the course, branching, and recrossing of the delegated power of the people to choose their own officers; but it goes so far and returns by so devious a route that we may say that the people of the village have no voice in choosing their postmaster. It is lost in the labyrinth of political machinery. Not so in the matter of roads and schools. The people elect a Road Master who personally supervises the work. The people vote the tax upon themselves, as much as they choose for roads and schools. They elect trustees to manage the local schools. The elections are usually annual, and the will of the people is the controlling force. Any unpopular movement is at once cheeked.

            There may be incompetence but no considerable abuse of power is possible. The postmaster may put the mail in his hat and go fishing, but the road master and school master do a full day’s work.

            How it is in Hawaii? Here the power cannot be traced to the people at all, nor to any legitimate source, except, perhaps, the will of God. The people, a class of them, elect legilators. Then there is a break, the stream runs under the ground.

            The legislature does not appoint the Cabinet. “Influence” does that. That the Attorney-General appoints a Marshal, the Marshall appoints a Sheriff who says “damn the people!” The Sheriff appoints a Deputy Sheriff who appoints the policeman. The policeman does business as a highway robber on a small scale. The deputy sheriff licenses a few select and private gambling houses, liquor shops, opium dens and the like.

            The sheriff takes a commission from his deputies, grants wholesale licenses, issues indulgencies to commit crimes, takes a consideration for those already committed; is as easily placated by a sacrifice as a wooden god. The Marshal and Attorney General import things and enter @ @ , and do a general merchandise business. It is not necessary to go into particulars, we could, but we don’t want to offend anyone.  

            And where does the people’s power come in? Where is the influence of the voter, and or the public press? – Gentle readers it does not come in: it is not in it. This kind of government is a humbugocracy.

 

THE FUTURE OF VACCINATION.

 

In order to help our poor, blinded and deluded Board of Health, from the egotism of some of its members, we published the following and hope that it will lead to a change in the action of the Board, toward those under its charge from the ignorant and inhuman practices of the past to a more practicable and charitable course in the future. We know that it is not pleasant for the egotist to accept friendly advice, especially where the bump of conceit is largely developed; but, we hope, however, for sweet charity’s sake, that conceit will laid aside and a common sense view will be taken of information, which is being promulgated by world renown medical scientists, and urged by a college or association of physicians.

            “Unquestionably the vaccination question will come very much to the front this year. The book on ‘Jenner and Vaccination,’ which recently came from the pen of learned contributor of the article on the subject to the Encyclopedia Britannica, marked an epoch in the controversy. And now that so great a biologist as Dr. Wallace, the author of a profoundly interesting work on Darwinism which appeared in 1889, has taken his stand against vaccination, in the presence of the Royal Commissioners, it may be safely concluded that a death blow has been struck to compulsory vaccination. In Boston (U.S.A.) a great sensation was recently caused by the death of Dr. Warren S. Stokes from blood-poisoning caused by vaccination. This doctor had been vaccinated in childhood; but as he was constantly being exposed to infection, he determined to be revaccinated. Two days after he had been re-vaccinated, he was seized with blood poisoning, and soon died. Events like these are rapidly rendering it more difficult for magistrates to enforce the law on the subject. It may be supposed that Mr. Stanley’s evidence strengthens the case of vaccination. But the whole force of it disappears when it is found that Zanzibaris were not only immune from the small-pox which ravaged Mr. Stanley’s other followers, but were also free from the attacks of the guinea worm, to whose attacks nearly all the Mahdis succumbed. It must be granted that it was not vaccination that made the difference in this case. Why, then, must it be granted that it made it in the other” – Christian Commonwealth.

 

ON DIT.

That there is a mind reader in Merchant street who excels Slater and the late Bishop, and that his S@ are well attended.

 

            That is was fortunate for Sarah that the wind did not blow her away when at the Pali.

 

            That when the great Sarah Bernhardt saw the wonderful turnout sent to the steamer for her she exclaimed, “Ah, Mon Dieu! What savages. Do @ takes me for Cleopatra or Venus? I won’t have an charict I walk in @ hack.

 

            That the trail of Evans reminds us of the old story about the prisoner who was asked: Guilty or not guilty, and who answered: How can I answer before I hear the evidence?

           

            That there was a moral pressure on the prosecutor in the Evans case which made him toe the mark.

            That a recess was taken in the Evans case at 12 o’clock to allow an attorney a chance to go to the Hotel and wash the opium smell out of his moustache.

 

            That our elite “intends to preset Her Majesty” on her birthday with a piano of native wood and that a subscription is being taken up for that purpose and that an loyal ex-marshal and dealer in pianos is the disinterested promoter of the scheme.

 

            That owing to a remark in Friday’s Ka Leo the pillars of Fort Street Church are seriously contemplating to declare a dividend.

 

            That the N.Y. Journalist says that the LEO edited by Mr. Bush is of great influence among the natives. That the editor is a Seventh Day Adventist, and to say the least, “somewhat fearless in both politics and religion.”

 

            That Minister Carter has resigned as Minister to Washington. This implies want of confidence in the present Cabinet and a gentlemanly regard to wishes of the Hawaiian People, as expressed by their only representative organ KA LEO O KA LAHUI. How different Minister Carter is from his relatives.

 

            That there is one thing the present administration excels in, and that is in the quantity of road lungs it employs to attend to road word, and the poor work that is done by some of them; that for wanton waste of means the road to Waialae is ahead of them all, and is not of any credit to those who are being well paid to look after it.

 

            That the correspondent of the P.C. Advertiser would like to have the people of these islands remain in ignorance to the true state of the Pearl Harbor subsidy passed by the U.S. Congress. The correspondent is ike the preacher that could not see the word God written before him but could see a five dollar piece placed over the word without the slightest difficulty.

 

That is was the “Bishop,” or a steamer very much like her, that made several nocturnal visits, during the opium season, at Maunalua harbor, (Coco Head.) and not at Thruston’s Cove, as it had been reported; that the excuse for doing that out of the way station was that the weather was too heavy outside, and thus it became necessary to unload the ship of part of its dangerous freight, which was buried in the sand for future reference; and that special constables are keeping a watch over it, so that it might not prematurely be turned into smoke, bricks or sea-shells.

 

            That the Advertiser thinks it is profane to speak of things as they are, fearing no doubt to hear some unpleasant truths about the doing of its supporters. It is high time for some one to speak the truth when we have preachers who advocates its suppression because it might touch brother John Thomas or Peter Stoner. Oh, ye generation of @ and stiff worked hypocrites that have bl@ at prostitution to fill your church @ and are making slaves of your followers while you utter abominations before God whom you profess to worship!