Hawaii Holomua, Volume II, Number 46, 24 February 1894 — Untitled [ARTICLE]

The Australia briu"s very little news oi mterest to Hawaii. i The Seuate Coraraittee has not reported yet on the qustion, but it is generally unj derstood that Cleveland’s policy - will be endorsed. The very word I “Hawaii’’ i« tobu in the States j and evervbody is sick aud tired of the very raentioning of our troub!es. Seuator Hill succeeded in defeating Cleveland’s nominee for the Suprerae Bench Judge2Peckhara, and the Taramany ring is highly elated. This is the second victory whieh Seuator H11 enjnys? He has ' stated though that he is deterrained to back the administra- j tion and the democratic policy iu all matters escepts appointiuents in the State of New York whieh he claius are his legitiraate right. Thore is an unusual dearth of uews 5n today’s mail. The Honolulu reporters to.the Sun Francisco papers have excelled ! t!iemselves in drawing on their fertile |and well-maunred imaiiinations. A\d now comes tbe Adcerti*er • l and publishes Paul Nenmann’s registration act, Jand admits that j the Holomua was right when we j stated a while ago that the bill j was pissed, signed by the Queen, aud then disappeared. When we made that stateraent we were ridiculed and given the direct , lie by ourmorniug contemporary, but at that time '!r. Castla was opposed to a general registration aud wauted to make it a measure against the Chine.se only. We are ple«sed to notice that a change has eome over the reform organ and that it now snpports what we consider a most important and vital meusure. H E advocated nn institction of boyeotting the other day. From | the latest copies of Sau Fraucisco papers, we see it stateil from Ho1 nolulu corresponients that “proi minent” merchants have stated 1 that the dismiā$al from Brewer (and Company of J. O. Carter, 1 | was simply an initiative step whieh wonld be foliowed by a wholesale discbarge of all employe©s who dider in opie.on ' from tho P. G. lf tbe corrospondent is telling the truth whieh we admit wonld bo remarkable—wonld it not be proper for Boyal ist employers to retaliate and fir< ont any employeo who svmpa l thizea with the annexationista. < ■-V-’ ■ ’ ,v : ■ : , v ■ v 3r-: '