Ahailono o ka Lahui, Volume I, Number 20, 1 February 1890 — Page 2Page PDF (1.08 MB)
The following are the last days allowed to the electors of Honolulu for registering their names, failure of which will deprive them of their right to vote:
First District, First Precinct, on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday from 4 to 8 p.m.
Second District, Second Precinct, on Tuesday and Friday from 5 to7:30p.m.
Second District, First Precinct, on Monday (3 to 6), Wednesday, (7 to 9) and Friday (2 to 6).
Second District, Second Precinct, on Monday, Tuesday and Friday from 7 to 9 p.m.
Third District, First Precinct, on Monday, Wednesday and Friday from 7 to 9p.m.
Third District, Second Precinct, on Monday and Thursday from 7 to 9p.m.
Fourth District, First Precinct, on Tuesday (7 to 9) and Friday (6 to 9)
Fourth District, Second Precinct, on Friday only, from 4 to 8 p.m.
Fifth District, First Precinct, on Monday and Friday from 7 to 9 p.m.
Fifth District, Second Precinct, Wednesday (4 to 7) and Friday 2 to 8 p.m.
The National Herald.
HONOLULU, FEBRUARY 1, 1890.
THE genuine Adullamites—the twin idiots back of the Daily Times!
THE lion and the unicorn were at the National Reform rally last night!
--Our candidates are required to promote and defend all measures for the advantage of the working classes.— National Reform Platform.
THE Times vacuum pan was empty yesterday. Government juice will probably be pumped in to-day, and “a strike” may be expected.
A DETAILED report of the monster mass meeting at the Armory, Beretania street, last night, printed from Bulletin type, accompanies to-day’s issue of the HERALD as a supplement.
THE Advertiser alluding to its political views, frankly makes the admission, “as to our bitterness and injustice, we fear, it is ineradicable.” This is the only campaign utterance of the organ that will be universally endorsed.
HEAD QUARTERS of the Opposition are to be found at the Pua-Wilcox residence at Palama. Old conspiracy quarters handy, near by.— Times.
Ah! We did not know that Messrs. Waterhouse and Thurston owned residences at Palama!
MEASURES without men—the government party’s platform! Men without measures—the government party’s candidates! Measures and men pledged to the people—the National Reform party’s platform and candidates!
THE TIMES may exert itself to invent absurd planks for the National Reform platform. Since the organ can find nothing in its own party’s declaration of principles to arouse enthusiasm it derides a platform whose purity renders it unsuitable for present government use.
THE present government mediated a certain treaty. In concession to popular clamor they repudiated it. Now they endorse it. Vote for the National Reform party which has “first last and every time” been against any treaty which provides for National nothingness.
THE Times wants to know where the editor of the NATIONAL HERALD was on the 30 th of last July. He was where every true hearted American should be, at home. He spent the day pondering over the unpatriotic folly of those who set the example of criminal revolution in 1887 and condemning the action of those who foolishly followed the example on July 30 th 1889!
--Our candidates are emphatically pledged to maintain the absolute independence and autonomy of the Kingdom.— National Reform Platform.
LAST Thursday night, in the yard of the Royal School, Messrs. Marques; Cummings, Bush and Wilcox addressed a large audience of natives, strictly belonging to the First Precinct of the Third District. Judging from the number present, the whole of the electors of that Precinct turned out to hear their future representative, who made a pithy speech, which was loudly applauded. There is no doubt that the native vote will be solid in the Third Ward for National Reform!
THE Times having run out of live ideas descends to the allegorical style of the Advertiser. In an article perfectly scintillating with wit, it renews the personal system of attack which has been such a feature of the government tactics during this campaign. Finding no vulnerable point in the National Reform platform it seeks for discord among its candidates. The National Reform party will look out for the unity of its party and political aims. Meantime let the Times reconcile Kaulukou, Kane and Achi to the government platform, to the other candidates and to the political intentions of the so called reform party.
The Advertiser wails thusly:--“Where is liberty! Where is independence! when people are cursed, threatened and ostracised if they date to vote against the ring represented by these men!” This is apropos of a lady being insulted at the fish market. We are moved to a fellow feeling of indignation. Great Scott! is it possible a lady cannot undisturbed deposit her ballot at the fish market several days before election? We do not however, understand how a person can be ostracised by a street insult, nor do we apprehend a right which has no political possession. The Milesian contribution to our political literature has more bulls than were propagated by Pope Pius IX.
THE Advertiser relates an incident of a lady was subsequently insulted at the fish market. We are forced to accept the Advertiser’s interpretation that the epithet is insulting. But the organ’s conclusion, attributing complicity and responsibility to the National Reform party therefore, justifies its reputation for absurdity and falsifying. We venture the assertion that every member of the National Reform party would feel insulted at being thus accosted, and the party is not made up of “desperadoes determined to win at any cost.” Will the author of Adullamite drivel explain how insulting ladies could possibly become electioneering tactics with any party!
It is as usual—as people expected—the ministry have again broken down in their attack on the people’s cause through the Times and Advertiser. They have but repeated the old blunder. Like the unskilled journalists and political leaders they are promises of a strong fight against the National Reform party have been made, only to be broken, as have been all previous official and governmental promises. Three days before election we stand before the world saddled with a self-disgraced ministry whose record is on of political perfidy, personal falsification and official blundering—a ministry despised by the people and openly snubbed and ignored for good reasons by some of the representatives of friendly powers, whose friendship honors us and whose enmity is not desired.
To sensible men the course pursued by the ministry during the last few weeks, is sufficient to justify the people in demanding the expulsion of the ministry and their party, which propose to retain them, with perhaps one exception, in office. The ministry have personally degraded their highest offices, in which they sit as trustees for the entire kingdom, into partisan headquarters for political purposes. Nay, they have gone further—they have violated the law by descending to the poltical stump, form which demagogism has been hurled at the National Reform party. Nor is this all—they have even degraded both office and official personality by gratuitously insulting friendly nations! They have purposely falsified international history to do this! But the end of their desperate course was not stayed after insulting friendly European powers. Even the American citizens residing here in 1839, and the American government of that time were openly vilified and misrepresented by the same perversion of historical facts!
The citizens of the republic whom the ministry are now trying to conciliate were spoken of as being favorable to the religious persecution attempted by the American Mission in 1839. The fact was suppressed that outside of the American Mission all bona fide Americans were bitterly opposed thereto. The fact was suppressed that on July 10, 1839 the American Consul issued a proclamation “to the citizens of the United States resident at the Sandwich islands,” which virtually endorsed Captain Laplace’s action and placed “all American citizens, excepting the protestant clergy,” under “protection on board the Frigate”! These facts were deliberately suppressed by the ministerial stump orator for partisan effect—to slur the National Reform party, to pervert truth and to insult foreign nations.
It is a little wonder that so bad a case breaks down, backed by as it is by boyish blunderers and an unscrupulous family compact with an unsavory and broken political reputation. What is that reputation? A reputation of lies; a reputation of broken promises; a reputation of religious bigotry; a reputation of land grabbing through an unrighteous mortgage system; a reputation of revolutionary crime; a reputation for contemplated and proposed political murder; a reputation for arrant cowardice; a reputation for attempted political treason; a reputation for everything low and mean and despicable with a constant and historic lack of reputation for patriotism, justice, honor or love of truth for truth’s sake!
Thus stands the case for the government party three days before election, backed by a broken-down defense which was, unfortunately for them placed in the hands of unskilled journalists and leaders at the last moment.
WHERE THEY STAND.
When the Time takes the HERALD to task on the treaty question it renders itself most ridiculous. The HERALD has challenged the Times to define its treaty demands. But the shifty organ harps on free trade, reciprocity, closer relations with the United States, etc., without explicitly explaining the terms of the treaty which it advocates. But every indication points to its endorsement of the Carter bargain: viz., the absorption of our autonomy by the United States in compensation for a few commercial concessions. Free trade at the expense of freedom!
The Times argues that we have only to demand this new treaty of the United States to get it. It is frank in its admission that this scheme emanates from these islands. It has in turn been repudiated by the people and the government. Si it must have originated with an interested few. That the government now endorses it simply shows a return to its clique allegiance. Now, supposing the authorship of this statesmanlike proposition to be conceded to a few interested planters, what additional benefits would accrue to the contracting parties, Hawaii and the United States? To Hawaii it would secure either partial or entire free trade. Would not a permanent extension of the commercial protection we now enjoy under the reciprocity treaty secure the same?
Now the United States is asked to give what it has already conceded when Hawaii was placed under tariff protection through the reciprocity treaty. But partial free trade, as the Times calls our present commercial protection, is not enough. The present government party demands absolute free trade and in addition a guaranty of sole protection. This protection, in the crafty intent of its promoters, is of two kinds: viz., (1) against foreign interference with our autonomy; and (2) an iniquitous alliance with the government against its own citizens! Now the according of this protection with the assumption of this extra responsibility would no result in one iota of additional advantage to the United States. Protection is not a title of ownership. The islands, geographically related as they are to the United States, could never in consonance with their own prosperity, make a treaty repugnant to that country. Policy and self-interest naturally ally us to that country. A sole protectorate could not cement closer