Ka Leo o ka Lahui, Volume II, Number 279, 14 September 1891 — Page 4

KA LEO O KA LAHUI.

"E Mau ke Ea o ka Aina i ka Pono."

 

KA LEO.

 

John E. Bush.

Luna Hooponopono a me Puuku.

MONDAY,  SEPT 14, 1891.

 

OLLA PODRIDA

 

 The exploits of "Barefooted Bill" are a public scandal and have proved the utter inefficiency and incompetence of our police force.  The native police do very well as wardens of the street, or to regulate any disorders that is in sight, and the highly paid white captains, alleged detectives, and bar-room roust abouts who are put over them, are equally as good, but no better.  But when it comes to the cunning class of criminals who are largely on the increase, such as sneak thieves, burglars, smugglers, and the like, our police are utterly incompetent to cope with them. A large sum of money is appropriated for the police service and the public have a right to expect some protection, but the successful burglaries of the pass few months prove that this is an easy territory for that class of criminal to work.  A police officer, to be efficient, must have some previous training ia a school of practical experience and under those who already know the ropes; such a training cannot be had here, and we would suggest to the Marshal that it would be a wise and beneficial move for him to captain his police with three or four trained men from the New York or Boston departments or from Scotland Yard, London.  Such men could be easily obtained, and their knowledge of detective work would ba sufficient for our present necessities; they would also be the instructers of our younger police.  In the Brisish East Indies, the native police are under the instruction of men from Scotland Yard who have organized a very fine service.

 

 The sugar question still vexes the mind of our planters and factors, and causes them no little anxiety, for the outlook ia not bright.  While generally opposed to them from a political standpoint, the LEO sympathizes with the sugar men to a certain extent for, notwithstanding their selfish greed, they represent the chief industry of the country upon which our prosperity has hitherto depended, (we hope for diversified industries in the future upon smaller farms).  What is the remedy for the present situation?  there appears to be none:  Will treaty revision help the matter?  gloomy for sugar.  What will or can be done?  no one knows as yet.

 

 The principal sugar countries have always made treaties with the United States whereby,  their sugars enter free, so that when the President imposes duties on the sugar of such countries as have not made treaties it will not have much effect upon the present market.  So we have no advantage to hope for on that score.  We might ask the United States to admit our washed sugar free, but the difference of value in favor of washed sugar is only about 1/2 cent which would be nearly consumed in extra labor, &c. So that won't count.  We cannot hope to obtain a bounty for it is almost certain that the bounties in the United States will be abolished, or will surely not be extended to a foreign country.  Were the United States to increase the duties on refined sugar from 1 cent to say 2 1/2 or 3 cents and send it in free, there would then be some hope, but that point was fought so hard when the McKinley bill was under discussion, that such a project cannot be revived.  In whichever way you view it the prospects for any further large profits on sugar are decidedly slim, and those plantations that are not yet free of debt or upon an economical basis will have to succumb.  The only solution of their troubles is in the labor question, and we do not pretend to say as yet how that is to be managed.

 

 Treaty revision offers no prospect of help to the sugar men.  But a new treaty with the United States must be made and that very soon.  That country has done us a great injustice, but it has not been direct or intentional; our relations with them happened to be in conflict with a new fiscal policy which they were adopting towards the whole world.  We consider the present treaty as nullified and obsolete, all the benefits we enjoyed under it being cancelled by the operation of the McKinley bill.  But the United States is our national market and must continue to be so, and our treaty relations with them must be renewed for our mutual benefit.  With free sugar guaranteed to America by statute as well as by numerous treaties with countries other than ours, our benefit from the treaty is nil.  On the other hand, America now enjoys the entire benifit, and we are enjing the entire burden of that compact.  But the United States have always been generous and in a new treaty we have reason to hope that they will not ask more than they will concede.

 

The Bulletin's Inconsistencies.

 

NEW SERIES.

I.

KA LEO thought that a detailed exposition of the Bulletin's inconsistencies and foibles would have rendered that giddy sheet a little more careful of its utterances.  But foolish children would be so obstinate!  And, as all "fools who never know where to stop," the little brainless man in the sham leader and reflecting "orb" not satisfied with the castigation he has already received, now load his patient readers with daily would be "digs" at the LEO, each subsequent one growing more flat and ridiculous for its inaccuracies and contradictions.  Evidently Chamberlain's medicine has not yet acted on the disordered bile, - and the Bulletin's liver sadly needs a new course of the LEO's whip, which will always be ready, whenever needed.

 

 Now for the first glaring inconsistency.  In its pompous editorial of August 19th, (not written, by the bye, nor even set by little Dan) the Bulletin reaches the apex of its indignation, because the LEO had made a guess, - and a correct one too, - at the authorship of a certain article 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 lack of ability and resources to discuss the merits of the points;"  then again "the insinuation that 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 Bulletin's "scribbler" thinking of himself when he incautiously penned the above condemnation??

 

 So then it is well understood that it is only the LEO, never the Bulletin, 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 "hardly ever," and only when "it has no other way of discussing the merits" of a writing.  What does the "orb" mean then, when it says, (Sept. 9th): "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 the government crib.  Without stopping to notice the elegant and malodorous" figurative expression belched out by the writer of the above, is not this a glaring attempt at a guess, a contemptible effort at fixing the authorship of that editorial on the wrong man whom the bilious Bulletin tries to designate sufficiently to throw edium on the unoffending victim of both the beaver and the kangaroo?  And how does this inconsistency match with this other one, that, according to the Bulletin's religion, "for any unsigned article, the editor is responsible and that should be enough?---Does the "orb's" rule apply only to its editor, not to the editor of the LEO because he is not the "senior" scribe in "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 Bulletin's motto.

 

 But that is nothing!  Another article of the LEO was "guessed" at, as "probably written by one of those loafers who are maddened because they could not ride to politicle preferment on the shoulders of working men" (Sept. 5th), is not this another rash kind of a guess, pointed at some presumed contributor of the LEO, and hitting probably one who had really nothing to do with the article?  But such was the only discussion that the orb's "ability" could afford on the subject!  Another again of the LEO's editorial was attributed to "the biggest lubber" of the LEO's "syndicate of swash-bucklers" (what kind of society have you been bred in Dan, to familiar with such bad forms of slang?)  Now, who this is intended for, is hard to tell, but, the nebulous, hazy mind that wrote it, this was evidently considered a clever guess and hit, which rendered useless any further discussion of the article; so this again sufficiently proves,-without going back to the other previous innumerable instances,-that the Bulletin never condecends to make a guess ...except when short of any other argument ...and such is unfortunately to often its predicament!!!

 

 Thus we see that the Bulletin is like a poisonous toad, which, when it feels the heels of a worn-crusher, writhe and squirms and spits out 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 recognize the objects aimed at by the Bulletin's "furioso rhetoric." KA LEO's writers have not yet been hit;  they stand high above little Dan's expectorating powers, and we would not even have noticed the nebulous insinuation, 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 capable of writing himself as good an English article as any found in the Bulletin, -of original production, -he is not seen going "round town begging for editorials" not any more than his comtemporary, 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 "editorial."  To refuse the LEO the benefit of this axiom, would be an inconsistency that even beavers and kangaroos could not be guilty of even though they have no known principles.  Therefore, oh dear beaver, let it be done unto you, as you do unto others!

 

II.

 By the way!  Dan!  when are you coming out with those principles of yours??  You find it a harder work than you thought, don't you?  As you said of our platform of 1890, it needs "common sense" to work one up, and that is precisely what is most lacking in the Bulletin sanctum!  But it is not rather inconsistent to promise the anxious public a platform "as ground-work for the next campaign" and to fail?  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!!

 

 "A sight to make the Gods weep for joy," is the inconsistency of the Bulletin talking about wooden heads; the readers will suggest blockheads!  Don't be so egotistically personal, Dan, and don't be always - thinking of yourself when you write, we are quite willing to acknowledge your self-conceit, but it makes us weary to see you constantly hitting yourself, or furnishing others arms against you!

 

 The Bulletin is very sore because 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 file of it, since the start of the first anti-Chinese agitation and the formation of the Mechanics' Union, we could ferret out enough expressions hostile to the mechanics, enough sneers and evidences of inconsistency to make Chamberlain's remedy act instantaneously.

 

ON DIT.

 

 That the invincible champion of freedom, Mr. D. L. Huntsman, of the firm of Mssrs. Nawahi & Huntsman, has returned from Maui, on law business for the firm.

 

 That one of the witnesses to be produced against Barefooted Bill, is a pair of Shoes.

 

 That the Acting Police Judge can punish a Marshal better than he can act the parrt of one.

 

 That the Marshal was fined one hundred dollars for exceeding his duty, in hunting for fire water on a Mr. Hunt's premises.  That this salutary lesson is hoped will not be lost on the executive division of our government.

 

 That the complainant Hunt laid his claim for damages at too modest a figure, five thousand instead of three hundred dollars would have better helped the Police Justice's sense of the proper award to heal Mr. Hunt's injured honor.

 

 That W.S.Wond, by promotion in the civil service would be entitled to a Clerkship in the Supreme Court, but not being of that kind that would wear a blue ribbon, forswear his home and race, he will never be promoted.

 

 That it is very gratifying to the Marshal that he has the opportunity to pay of a Bill, though it is only a barefooted one, as a diligent search about the office may discover quite a number of threadbare bills which he has not been as fortunate with as the former.

 

 That the "Colonel" has been suspended for being too much of a disciplinarian, having complained of irreglarities in a fellow overseer.  That a noble youth, named Titus Manlius, had his head taken off for exceeding orders, in daring to step out of the ranks, and slay Metius, his country's enemy.  The Colonel had his official head cut short for simply doing his duty.

 

 That the firm of Ashford & Ashford has hunted a hundred dollars out of the Marshal, and his pose, for hunting after a Mr. Hunt under a wrong scent.  That it was clearly proven that there was no feed house on the premises, and no heathen confederate in the affair, and as no one could be played as a scapegoat by the defendants, it was surprising that only a hundred dollars damage was awarded as a soother.

 

THE HEATHEN CHINEE,

 

AIR - Fight of the Kearsarge and Alabama

 

'Twas on a Sunday morning.

 Long past the month of May,

A Christian Chinee for consolation,

 To church did early wend his way.

 To church there to pray, yes, to pray.

 

His petitions were not a few,

 As he sought the baron's god,

For protection and for favors,

 From a hungry angry mob.

 Yes, a cadaverous howling mob.

 

His heathen cognomen was Ahiseu,

 Late the Flowery Kingdom he did flee,

For safety to the shores of Owhyhee,

 With three hundred heathen Chinee.

 Hungry, howling, starving Chinee.

 

To the great Joss I'll never lie, -

 The greedy barons made me go,

And for them I've risked my hide,

 To save my queue, I must hie,

 From this angry mob or I die,

 

A noise is heard outside the Church,

"Behold" an excited mob of Chinese.

A leader was declaring their intentions.

"An interpreter caught on" as follows:

Oh, I'm a son of a great gun,

From the land of the Sun,

And with my everlasting queue,

I can hang barons or lying Ahiseus.

I'm a Pactolus "Pake" in Kohala town,

By Aseu "we've all been done Brown."

I'd give my whack of No. 8 rice

And rotten salmon, for a big slice,

Off of Brown aud his pious @seu.

 

 The matter was here cut short by the appearance of several black snakes, thus giving the heathen Celestial agent an opportunity to finish his prayers in the barons fashionable house were they meet and pray to be forgiven for the same sin - lying and starving the heathen Chinee.

  -Written for KA LEO.