The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1862-01-23
THE PACIFIC
Commercial Advertiser.
January %.

WE have read the defense of the MINISTER OF
FINANCE in the last issue of the Government
Organ. We have read it, and are surprised
that no other or stronger arguments, can be
advanced why the MiuIster should DE retained, or
why he should not be summarily dismissed, in
compliance with the unequivocal wish of the
of the people. The apology savors of the last
feebly-uttered periods of a lawyer pleading his
case, which, by an overwhelming evidence,
has become lost beyond all peradventure, even
in his own we'll balanced mind, and is but
awaiting the enunciation of the ~juridical verdict.
Silence would have carried greater weight in the
Minister'S behalf, had it been allowed to exercise
its mute assistance.
From beginning to end, from its first para
graph to the last, it betrays a forlornness of
hope, q feebleness of argument, and n contra
riety of - facts rarely exhibited to the keen
gaze of newspaper critics. Yet for all this, the
budget and its contents must receive our notice,
for the birdlings bear the unmistakeable impress
Of having sprung from a ministerial oyarium.
Passing ny the studied effort made in the out
set, and throughout the article in the POiyne-
sian, to create the idea that the structures made
in this paper originated from .. personal preju-
dices," which was denied by us, and which a
re-denial will not strengthen; we accept the rule
advanced by this Ministry as sound and polite,
and trust it may receive the support and practice
of King, chiefs, people and of the Ministers them
selves. as a wise and safe precedent to follow:
" We eOuld have subscribed to the assertion to some Y.
tent, and Joined them in representing to His Majesty the King
removable at his pleasure, yet, inasmuch as in constitutional
countries they are responsible TO the law Of public opinion as
well as the law Ofthe Land, and by that very responsibility con-
stituie and secure the Inyioahiliy and sacredness Of his own
person, therefore constitutional mOnarchs are bound in rturn
| TO make use only Of such servants Ehp. while Acceptable To them
selves, shan mot have incurred personal objections or pTejaices
whether such prejudices BE- only temporary or permanent"
Following down the column, we find this par
agraph
"Bu what does history and the records OF the country say,
When a journalist attempts to cover his personal dislike Of the
motives become justly suspected, and the object in view, being
transparent to all, is defeated by the very means employed to
Let u. now hold the light Of history to these charges, and
see how they shrink at the touch Of truth. 1t is said that {" he
found the Treasury in funds in 1855, and in a prosperous con-
diton we nO~ see 1t empty and embarrassed Alas for truth
AZ te glnGs which Mr.. Gregg found in the Treasury on the
Three hundred and forty-nine Dollars and twenty-four Gents )
but he found also a public deb; Of $4,000, and he found him
which he had no hand in devising. and to carry on which the
Legislature ofIsS5 had ordered the Minister Of FINANCE to Dor
row money
\ sorry historian indeed would the above
writer make, when, accusing others of misstating
facts, he himself makes more grossly-unfounded
assertions; among which We may notice
lst.-Mr. Gregg did not assume the duties of
Minister Of Finance till July 1858. and has there
fore held the Office about three years and a half.
What, then, had he to do with the finances as
they stood on the 3lst of March of that year? 1t
is true there was a mall balance of S349 "a on
hand that day, March 3lst,) and a debt of
$4,000, but for aught that appears to the con-
trary, the figures may have been reversed en- the
LIST of July, showing a larger balance and a
smaller debt. The statement then, of what the
condition of the Treasury was prior to his in
cumbency, has nothing to do with the matter at
issue.
2d.-The assertion made above. land il has
before been made that the object for which the
public debt was incurred, was to carry on the
public improvements, is entirely gratuitous and
unfounded. 1t is true that the Legislature of
1855 authorized the borrowing of Sl50,000 for
a. objects and improvements designated by law -
but as no special objects were designated by law,
all sums borrowed went into the Common Ex-
chequer, and were used as much to pay the Min
isters' salaries or any other objects, as to pay
for public improvements.
81 History and the records of the country
when impartially referred to, are terrible wit
nesses. He who attempts 20 defend a Minister by
holding 'the light of history to his acts, will! be
defeated by the very means used to defend him.
80 Alas for truth 80 What shall we say of a