Ahailono o ka Lahui, Volume I, Number 21, 3 February 1890 — Page 2

Page PDF (1.02 MB)



            Having very good reasons to believe that, in spite of the stingent proscriptions of the present law and the instructions of the Minister of Interior, many workers of the so-called “Reform” or government party, are resorting, during the present campaign, to bribery, threats, pressure, promises of different kinds, and other “corrupt or illegal” practices forbidden by the sections 88, 90, 93, 94, 101 and 102 of the electoral law of 1888;

            Therefore, the sum of $100 will be paid by the Central Committee of the National Reform party to any person or persons whose evidence will procure the conviction of any such malpractices, and the above sum will be raised to $150, if the person convicted be a government officer.

                                                Per order of

                                                            CENTRAL COMMITTEE,

                                                                        NATIONAL REFORM PARTY.





            The undersigned, feeling under the deepest and most lasting obligations to the many ladies and gentlemen, who, by their noble acts and timely sympathy, came to his assistance in his late hours of affliction and trouble, wishes to take this opportunity of publicly expressing his grateful thanks and heartfelt gratitude to each of his kind friends who extended him such humane and timely favors.         


                                                                                    DAN’L LYONS.



The National Herald.







            “May I sue for your protection,

                        Says the Kingdom of Hawaii,

            “Tis the only kind of safety

                        That doth captivate my eye.

            I’m so eager for protection

                        That I do not care a d---------

            Whether, being thus protected,

                        I am bond or I am free ;

            And if in the solution

                        Things should get completely mixed,

            I am willing, brother Jonathan,

                        To be “truly yours” annexed.

            My autonomy I value,

                        Only to secure the ends

            Of exchange for its equivalent

                        In sugar dividends!”

                        -- Government papers please copy.



            “But what shall we say of the other wing of the opposition.” --- Advertiser.

            WELL, say that its election by a large majority is an assured fact!


            “That there is strong re-actionary movement here is no wonder.”--- Advertiser.

            SAVE us from friends! How unkind to the government party!


            THE Advertiser affects to discover and be alarmed over attempts by certain agencies to arouse race antipathy. This is one of the laughable somersaults that the organ sometimes turns. Only a short time since it declared the conferring of suffrage upon Hawaiians a political mistake!


            THE eagerness of the government party to have the kingdom incorporated with the United States, naturally creates a prejudice against allowing Englishmen to acquire any sway in the legislature. This will account for the opposition to the election of certain English gentlemen on Hawaii.


            “That the re-actionary leaders do not try to answer the arguments of the reform party is no wonder.” – Advertiser.

            CERTAINLY not, for the reason that, (1) there are no “re-actionary leaders; and (2) that it is impossible to find any arguments of the party to answer. But its record exists and will be passed upon by sufferage.









The Proposed Treaty Question.


            The last and greatest blunder of the government party has been committed by L.A. Thurston in his attempted evasion of the HERALD’S charges against him. These charges were based on his illtimed, dishonest and almost universally condemned speech delivered at the Armory last Thursday evening. Our feeling towards L.A. Thurston is now one of pity and commiseration. We hate to be obliged to hit a man when he is down, but where truth and the public good both demand it we have no choice L.A. Thurston is the acknowledged leader and campaign organizer of the government party’s campaign. His party came into power by force of arms and now endorces its ministerial leader in an attempt to retain control of the government, first, by purposely perverting history, and secondly , by deliberately lying to defend his perversion of historical facts. This lame, dishonest and knavish defense   by L.A. Thurston is made under the pretene of defeding the attitude and position of the United States in regard to Hawaii. L.A. Thurston is reminded that when the honor of the United States needs defense ten thousand patriotic Americans pens will move in unison and when her soil or citizens need protection, million of freemens’s swords will leap into the air! America needs neither the lying defense nor the self-interested, dishonorable justification offered by the non-American, political illegitimates led and represented by L.A. Thurston.


            We re-charge (1) That L.A. Thurston purposely garbled, misstated and suppressed portions of Hawaiian history for political purposes. (2) That in evading thes charges, as the leader and defender of the government party, he deliberately lied as to the charges we brought against him. (3) That in his attempted evasion and defense he stands self-convicted of our accusation of suppressing historical facts by admitting and publishing one of the facts suppressed. (4) That he has untruthfull, needlessly and purposely slandered the character and memory of a dead American official. This slander was undoubtably uttered to slur the documentary proof of the HERALD and at the same time to try to shield the clouded reputation of his ancestors, who were at least partially responsible for thedespicable deeds committed by the missionaries between the years of 1836 to 1840.


            We will prove our position and will then re-affirm our charges made against the government party through the utterances of L.A. Thurston. We will treat our first two acusations together. In his evasion of our charges L.A. Thurston says: “The HERALD charges: That I have ‘purposely and knowingly garbled and misstated Hawaiian History for political purposes’; and that the demands of the French in 1840 and 1851 were based upon the differences existing between the two countries in 1839.” [The italics are ours.] The first half of the above quotation is the general charge made by us; the second half, printed in italics, is the deliberate lie added by L.A. Thurston himself to cover his previous political dirty work. Please note that this ministerial demagogue has fallen so low that he attempts an evasion of our specific charges by adding a lit to our general charge and then answering his own deliberate lie, while he entirely ignores both our general and specific accusations!


            L.A. Thurston has no further claim to the title of honest and honrable gentleman. His own defense convicts him The HERALD among other things charged:

            L.A. Thurston affirmed he would state “briefly” the history of Hawaii with France in doing this he purposely suppressed facts, which chronologically preceded those he did state and again purposely suppressed other facts intervening between those stated and the resolution passed at the dictation of the dominant missionary faction by a subservient legislature, to cover the open disgrace brought upon the American missionary faction by their own actions in the year 1839.

            It will be seen tht we did not include the demands or actions of the French in 1849 and 1851 in either our charges or our proof, as asserted by L.A. Thurston. We purposely limited our charges and our proof to the year 1839; we proved these charges and they stand undenied and undeniable as they must. We mentioned only incidentally a resolution and proclamation “put forth twelve years after the facts.” which was intended by the missionaries to officially shield the whole course of their brethren including their nefarious actions in the years 1837-1839.


            But this is not all. L.A. Thurston in his attempted defense admits that “in 1844 France voluntarily returned to the Hawaiian Government the $20,000, which had been exacted by Laplace in 1839.” This was another of the facts suppressed by L.A. Thurston in his speech and will sustain a further charge by us that he garbled history by suppressing important facts which occurred after the year 1839. But L.A. Thurston has ignored our charges that the trouble of 1839 was caused by the violation of the treaty of 1837 by the American mission and that he suppressed facts immediately following the arrival of the French man-of-war in 1839! Will L.A. Thurston answer these charges or attempt to deny the proof we gave? No, he dares not! He stands to day convicted of the moral crime of historical perversion and deliberate misstatement of the charges brought against him by us!


            To evade the effects of this course against himself and his party L.A. Thurston deliberately adds a lying slander against Hon. J.C. Jones in the following language:

            Incidentally it may be stated that Mr. Jones was not U.S. Consul in 1839, he having been removed from that office by his own government, in 1838, on account of his disreputable character.

            The only error in our former article was an intimation that Mr. Jones was American Consul when he signed the document sent to Captain Laplace. But this oversight of ours is no excuse for L.A. Thurston, missionary like, utterly a lying slander agianst a dead man. We pronounce this slander against the memory of an honorable American gentleman and unqualified lie, of which we will publish an official contradiction as soon as it can be secured from the proper records in Washington!


            But there is a design and method behind all this perversion of history, this official and personal lying, this misrepresentation of the attitude and position of America towards Hawaii, this advocacy of the free trade doctrine, this exhibition of prejudice against the candidacy of resident Englishmen, this gratuitous insult offered friendly powers !— there is a design and method in all this, we say, which is closely connected with the policy of this government in regard to the attempted new treaty relations with the United States. An exposure of the treaty methods of the present government and their probable results will be given in the HERALD to-morrow. The facts will throw a flood of light upon both the lying dishonesty of L.A. Thurston and his endorsement by the candidates of the government party!!


            THE arrogant intolerance inherited from a bigoted missionary ancestry qualifies L.A. Thurston for “making things hot” for such English and French residents as are outside the sacred margin of the missionary clique. The intolerance of 1839 has suffered no dominution by hereditary transmission to 1890.


            It is the duty of every honest and high-minded man in Honolulu to take a stand against those who play upon race prejudice.” – Advertiser.

            The balance of the article which we have not space to quote is a diatribe against certain native nominees. We cordially endorse the Advertiser’s exhortation even though it must react against that journal.


            THAT the Japanese Government demands sufferage for its subjects in this Kingdom is no news. Our government is diplomatically temporizing with Japan pending a larger emigration from her shores. When the influx has reached the desired number it is the intention of the government to acquiesce. A clause in the Constitution will require a little tinkering to secure the result but the government is equal, in case of re-election, to any such emergency.


            THE Bulletin replies to our strictures on the board of education. It contends if the president is useless he must be harmless and therefore worthy of retention. We will not seek to controvert our contemporary’s theory that being a non-entity earns incumbency. The attitude of this journal on the question of Mr. Bishop retiring or forfeiting his position is one of profound indifference. We do not regard his removal as a national calamity nor do we consider his retention as likely to be prolific of any special benefit to the education interest of the kingdom. So far as we are concerned he is welcome to play president any length of time for the entertainment of the Bulletin. We sought to fix responsibilty where it belongs and