Ka Leo o ka Lahui, Volume II, Number 279, 14 September 1891 — The BUlleton's Inconsistencies. [ARTICLE]

The BUlleton's Inconsistencies.

NEW SERIES. | ■" L ■ i Ka Leo thought that a detailed exposition of the Bulletin''s ineonsisteneies and foibles would ha*/e rendered that giddy sheet a little more careful of its utterances. But foolish children would be so obstinate 1 And, as all u fools who never know where to stop," the little. brainless man in the sham leader and reflectmg 4< ©rb," not satisfied with the castigation he has already received, now load his patient readers with daily would be at the Leo, eaeh subsequent one growing moi-e fiat and ridiculous for its inac2uracies and contradictions. Evidently Chamberlain's medicinci has not jret acted on the disordered hile,—and the Bnlletins liver sadly needs a new course of the Leo's whieh will always be read}% whenever needed. Now f#r the first glanng ineon» sistency. In its pompous ediU)rial |ofAugust l9th, (not writtea, bv |the bye, nor even set by littloI)an) [ the Bulktln reaches the apex of its | indignation, because the Lko had madc a guess, — and a corre<* one too, —at the authorBbip of a certairf

articre published in the Queen Street sheet: "Frantic guesses. said the orb, at the authorship of articles, with cowardly attacks on the persons presumed to have been the authors, are presented {for laek of aMity and resources to discuss the merits of the pointSj?' then again 4, the insinuation tbat the Minister of Finance wrote the article only reflects contempt at the writer making it, in showing that he has no other reply to the opinions and sentiments of the article" .... was the BvXletin y s "scribbler" thinking of himself when he incautiously pehned the above condemnation?? So then it is well understood that it is only the Lro, never the B<ulletin, that indulges in that awfully bad practice, so severely branded, of trying to guess at the authorship of an article. As for the Bulletin, oh dear! Never ..,. that is to say l, hardly ever, ? ' and only when 4t it has no other way of discussing the merits" of a writing. What does the u orb" mean then, when it says, (Sept. 9th): tI A screaming article of three columns in the Leo, denouncing the Queen, etc., is all wind off a stomach kept empty by the will of the people and the mercy of providence, of fodder from tbe government crib ' Without stopping to notice the elegant and "naalodorous" figurative expression helehed out by the writer of the above, is not this a glaring attempt at a

guess, a contemptibie effort at fixing tbe autborsbip of that editoriai *n tbe wroug man wbom tbe bilious Buūetiu tri€B to designate sufficiently to tbrow ©dium on the unoffeudmg victim of both īhe beaver and tbe kangaroo ? And how does this ineonsistency match with this other |?ne, that, according to the Bulletvn?§ religion t u for any unsigned article, the editor is fesponsible, and that shoidd be enough f.... Does the ,{ orb's" rule apply only to its editorj not to tbe editor of the Leo becauee he is not the "senior" scribc in u continuous service ?" One rule for my adversaries another one for me ! or do as I tell you, and not as I do myself ought to be the BvMe~ tin J s motto.

But that is nothing! Another article of the Leo wa6 U guessed ,j at, as tl probably written by one of those loafers who are maddened becaut:e thev could uot ride to po!itical preferment on the shoulerB of workingmen" (Sept sth), is not this another rash kind of a guess, pointed at some presumed contributor of the Leo, and hitting pro-1 bablyone who had really nothing! to do with the article ? But such! was _tlie only discussion that the orb's "ability" could afford on the subject! Another again of the Leo's editorial was attributed to <l the biggest lubber" of the Leo's u syndicate of swash - bucklers ,> (what kind of society have you been sred in Dan, to familiar with such bad formsof slang?) Now, who t'tiis is intended for, is hard to tcll t but, the nebulouB, hazy mind that vrrote it, this was evidently consici ewKl a clever guess and hit, whioh reiulered uselesa any furthor d'scussion of the artiole; so this again sutticiently proves,—without going batk to other previous innumei*able instanoes,T-4hat the B\Uktm n ever condescends guess . except when short of any other arxvimenl .... and such is unfortunately tro often itn pre*dt<Sirnept !f! % t

Thus we see that the BuUeiin is like a peieonona toad, whieh, when it feels the heels of a worn-crnsher, tmthe and sqmrms and spitß oa.it its venom .blindly; it has repeatedly tried to fasten its bilgy spit in several directions, but has always gone wide of the mark, and the Leo fails to recoghize the objeets i aimed at by the BvXUtin\s '*fnrioso i rheturic." Ka Leo's writers havel not yet been hit; they stand high above little Dan's expectorating powers. and we would not even have noticed ihe nehuloua iaaiuuation, the wild guesses, Were it not for the drola and weakness of little Dan, falling himself into the errors he so contemptuously condemns in others. The editor of Ka Leo is quite eapahle of writing himself as good an English articīe as any found in the Bulletinī —- of original production, — he is not going u round town begging for editorials' ? not any more than his contemporarv, and he agrees to this declarttion of the Bulletin that it would be beneath the dignity of any journal to admit or deny that its editor wrote any particular l, editorial." To refuse the Leo thebenefit of this axiom, would be &n iriconsistency that even beavers ajid kangaroos could not be guilty of, even though thev have no known prlnciples. , Therefore, oh dear beaver, let it be idone unto you, as you do unto others! 11. By the way 1 Ban ! when are~ you coming out with those principles of yours ?? You fi|id it a harder work than you thought, don't you ? As you said of our platform of 1800, it needs "eommon sense" to work one up, and thal?is precisely what is most lackingin the Bullelin saßctum { But it is not rather inconsistent to promise the anxious public a platform a as ground-work for the ncxt campaign V. and to fa.il? What are we going to do, in default of yoUr-ground work to build upon? Do not abandon us in our needs, oh Canadian prophet !1

44 A sight to make the Gods weep for joy," is the inconsistency of the BvMetin talking about wooden heads; the readers will Buggest blockheads! Don 7 t be so egotistically personal, Dan, aud don't be always—-thinking of yourself when you write, we are quite wilHng to acknowledge your self-conceit, but it makeB us weary to see you eoastantly hittiug yourself, or furnishing others arms against you ! ! The BuUetin is very sore becauso the Leo calls a cat a cat, and asserts that the Queen Street sheet has never been truly a friend and advocate of the mechanics and laboring classes; it inconsistently denies the charge, but if we were kindly furnished with a complete fiile of it, since the start of tle first anti-Chine3e agitation and the formation of the Mechanics' Union, we could ferret out eaough expres sions hoetile to the mechanics, enough sneers and oWdences of inconsistency t« make Chamberlain ? s remedy act instantaneously.