Nuhou, Volume I, Number 13, 27 January 1874 — The Rev. Sereno E. Bishop [ARTICLE]

The Rev. Sereno E. Bishop

Tmets tfiat wē will join in a eall for u public reprobation " of obscene publicatioiij and we do so most heartilyj feeling that tlie Reveren<3 gentleman will not only join us in the reprobation of the " filth " that he has pointed out, butalso of that whieh we have indicated. We doubt not that he as a CKristian educātor of youth will demand with a tmmpet tongue the expurgation of every vileness that stains the sheets of Hawaiian literature; but we cann()t refrain from an espresBion of eurpriß'e, that this zealous watchxnan on tlie towers of Zion not have dis3erned any blots on the pages of our native literature fitted fbr the " education of youtli into oviluntil he obeerved them } at this late daj, in tbe columns of the Nuhou . What ean have obseured hls seyere evahgelical vision iiī respect to the— sinears and stains that overlaj the Kuokou and Laieikawai 5 whieh have becn in his view, 10, these many years? Did there seem to him, ln poititing out our sin alone, a good ehanee to suppress adisturbing element hy firing at us a point blank charge of obscenitj and so smash our brittle mansion, and blast all our pretensions ? It would seem to be so; bccause if ChriBtian Oharifcj had dictated the admonkion, it would have been sent to us. We would have heeded it, we would have deplored any blot that unobserved might have stained our fair pages, and we would have thanked our Qhristian Monitor. But it was not tbus hedealt witli us— he sends his reproof unto our cnemy,—an indiscreet 4 4 p»g-heacled man, who not content with the assault froiii the Reverend pen (wliieh wou!d have been far more eflfective alone) but he, thc impure Pan of Hawaiian print, muel try his pitchfork to throw dung on our person, whieh, however, the wind of popular opinion hurled back into his own face, We hope that the purity of conduct and chastc and innocent livee of the studcnttf of Lahainaluna fulJy illustrate the scvere vignancc of ite chief Professor 5 this Reverond Censor, We hope thai Robiana Lo and Laieikawai have not Iheen beguiling the hours of reeess among the studcnlt? when the chaBtening inōuenee of c!ass dieclplinc ie removed, But thero i» eome suspicion on this point. Perhape the t( Weekly Manuecript Journal ip «tained wJth iuspiratioQ from eueh soureee aa well m with eome from the Nuhou, Xhercfore, Reverend Sir, pleaeē esamloe it more cloeely i

and be not parlial m your denuriciaiiong ; and when Lext you ; epeak Lefore the Mieeion Childrēn"e Societj, and taik of the " namelesetumtin the tongue of the Hawaiian, and boa«t of the purity of jour so-ealled £i colony;" reflect a little, and eee if jou have not to deplsre the re6ulte of a mere intelleotjunl teaching that never jeducated the hdart of a heathen people, that the nameleea taint " maj be on jour ekirtt= ae well iae in their utteranceB, and that in jour eall for |public reproba|tion ōf our errors, jou inaj laj j youreelf open' the sugpieion of being a eon- : eommale hjpoci-i{e,.