Nuhou, Volume I, Number 16, 18 April 1873 — OUR PLANTING INTERESTS [ARTICLE]
OUR PLANTING INTERESTS
Ōnee so ably defencled by the OeaeUe, are har<lly safe from atlaek by the present eelitor of that papei\ He avows it is true, at tliis lime a solicitous regard for the interests of planters, but |liis solieitude does not eorrespond with his past strictures*. īn fact, having started a paper with a view to make monev and ignore principle, he is ēvident-ly disposed to go back 011 all of his old record, ahd as many of his friends say, will do anything to make a dollar. This is a harsh statement, but his own record furnishes ample opportuuity for making the charge. In liis leader of the 9th inst M he endorses the planting ihterest in a manner to lead a stranger to suppose that he was its especial eliampion ; and in his leader of the 16tlij he contends for contract labor, sayii]g, that " 110 laborer should have the option to wilfully absent himself from work, and thus violate his engagement;' T and then furthermore says in view of a certain decision of the Supreme Oourt, u no Cliinese, no Jax>anese, &c,, ean be induced to niigrate hither t o serve under contract. ?7 Now turn bacK to 1869, about the time of a certain planters meeting, wiien he speaks of the planters so sneeringly as in opposition to the u bone and sinew ?? and all that sort of -thmg of the country. In one plaee he says, u the bondage of the coolies who have-been introduced here t-o labor under circumstances so revolting to pliilanthropists is.no more nor ditferent in its essential %)oiiits than contracted native labor under * the law r s of this kingdoni.' ? Again he says, u a native born Hawaiian who signs a eontract to labor for a term of years,—according to the laws of this kingdom siniply sells liimself for that time. ?7 In liis reply to Bev. J. Oreen, he says u our labor system is as wicked as ever slavery was. ?? And under the lieading u Our Pratform on the Labor Q,uestioii, n he says u No. 5. That tlie Master and Servant law being unconstitutional ought to be amended—a relic of barbarism whieli must be wiped out from our statute book. n But we are tired of quoting; we eouhl nll eolumn upon eolumn with such evidence of contradiction of his prēsent aititude. He seems, we will say charitably, somewhat llighty, deiicient "in memory f and perliaps ■- not altogether the reckless and unpnneipled man that tliese contradietions would make liini appeai*. But tliis lapsus oi' domentia of his mental condition show what an unfit person h'e is to be entrixsted withl any puhlie iiiterest, and least of,all to be In j a positimi to bo 44 a guide, philosopher and li'ioiKl of such an enlightened eommunity aa ouys. " . Burēly, planters wiil not be deceived by his present plausiblc cajoleries. He opposed their interests K especially the labor systcm, upon wliieh they depend, most l)itterly in times past ; rfnd as tho. <l Ethiopiau does no(,chauge his skin,- no more does a double ilyed fana(ic like the present oditor of the Oazc(fc over change liis eanting, demagogic views, and pretended regard for therights of the 4> bone and of tlie country, as in opposiuon to the u arisiacratic planter. M