The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1863-04-09
THE PACIFIC
Commercial Advertiser,
THURSDAY, APRIL 9.

THURSDAY. APRIL 9.
The decision of Chief Justice ALLEN in the
recently contested liquor case, will be found
on our fourth page, corrected of some impor-
tant errors. His Honor takes up the case as
left by Judge ROBERTSON, and confines his
remarks almost to the points of the Constitu-
tionality Of the liquor law, and its alleged
conflict with the French Treaty. What is said
regarding the Hawaiian Constitution is well
worth attentive perusal:
the King. Whatever power or rights which he alienated by this
Constitution, was done from his own convictions Of justice and
neither was it ordained or established by them. From the
consideration which he bore them, h. declares TO them in the
instrument itself, that it shall not be considered as finally
established until the people, by their keprgssntatyss' have
orlbIe like Runnymede. where the Barons Of England compelled
people have ever compelled the Kametamehas 10y the sword to
grant them a Constitution. I'll was a free-"ii Offering on the
wisdom to give strength to his Kingdom, symmetry to its laws
and prosperity t" his people
The Constitution of 1910, as well as that of
1852, was not framed and promulgated for the
benefit of foreigners So much as for Hawaiians.
1t was intended to improve the latter, to raise
them in the scale of humanity, from the condi-
ton of serfs in which they were, to occupy a
higher status. 1t was an experiment very like
that of the present Emperor of Russia, in lib
Grating the millions of serfs of that empire
fraught indeed with peril to the security and
peace of the realm, but prompted and carried
out with the most benevolent motives on the
part of the sovereign, to benefit his subjects.
When, therefore, the Counsel for the defense
undertook to interpret the Hawaiian Constitu-
ton by that of England or America, they
engaged in a task for which no precedent could
sustain them. France couId never permit the
- constitutionality'' of the laws of Tahiti to be
decided by the reading of her own liberal code
nor would England ever allow the prohibitory
laws now in force in New Zealand TO be broken
down because they might be ~adjudged uncon-
stitutional' in England. On this point, the
decision is explicit
The argument Of Counsel was very able and eloquent in its
Constitution. and to the rights Of an American citizen under
the Constitution % the United States, on the great principle
that laws should affect all people alike bui its fallacy consisted
IL their misrepresentation OF the true spirit, intent and purpose
Of the Hawaiian Constitution as applicable to Hawaiians. 1t
is tn. great charter Of the rights of the King, the chiefs, and
the people for 1t has been - declared by mutual accord. But
in giving a construction to us PROVISIONS, II there ever was an
instance when the history Of the grant and Of the people, and
euce in its construction, it is unquesionabIy in this. The Leg
isla,ure of the Kingdom has always been peculiar in this, that
to Mature subjects. since the formation of the Government"
y little farther on, the language of the Court
is still more clear:
There is a peculIarty in the Government and in the business
GAANAN " s@ "AfAH AANA"fs 80 e1TN ~ eAhA anu a NpTIW lLANRAA
Of the foreign element with the aboriginal Its workings have
been harmonious and mutually useful And white it has been
80. q has been the gracious policy OF the aboriginal race. in
whom Was vested the legislative power. in passing laws OF a
restrictive character TO apply them exclusively to themselves
IL al becomes the foreigner 10 complain Of rhIs ayyiicd-
ff0H, and az HeUcT could hare been the meaning and intent
Of the frame = OF the Constitution 10 erciudS from the
ieyisfGfiUe council the poTeI 10 pass idws eTeiusireLy
applicable 10 HaUaiiaH subjects, UhHs those Eaus reTe an
a~ccOrdGHce ruth the SPIrIt and genius If their COHStitu-
fOH. The aboriginal race would have never surrendered this
power, because they always have been aware. and more espe-
ciaIy at the period when the Constitution was adopted. that
there were some axs which were regarded a. wise for them.
which we're not applicable To foreigners. or at least would tend
70 promote difficulties, even if not in conflict with treaty
stipulations-
Never could an attempt to break down the
authority of the Constitution have received a
more decided rebuke than is given in the sem
tence which we have italicized. We see a party
of foreigners, thoroughly organized, coolly set
ting 70 work, under the leadership Of able counsel,
without any solicitation from the native popula-
ton, to try to a~brogate laws relating not 10
thar Otrn rights, but to those of the native race
not 10 secure 10 the JorGigner any greater free
tom, but 10 deal poison and death, aye, to hurry
TO an early and utter determination, the fast
decreasing aboriginal population of Hawaii nei.
Such an attempt merited the keen re5uke which
it received, and which should shame those who
stand up to apologize for it.
While the case was pending in court, there
an effort made to bring to- its aid a little