The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1868-05-23

Immediately much more money q, Us an than ly Civ
iur SAY $1,000 f- various rrr'- o. 7t-rr iIH-
~-... e.-,,-o. -a,,~.~.". -. y~.. s. s.~as, 3 .v,u-..
on Oahu; 5000 on Kauli, and the remainder on
MolCkal, Lanai, &c. The amount would not make p
very grclt show ON internal improvements over the
whole i-,uals. There is S25, 600 at once (half the
amount II the subsidy now asked for a little distance
of road down the PaiI ON Oahu alone, and which
would mainly benefit the people OF koolau. And lie
10 remembered that each improvement II this nature
has mainly only "A local eiTcct These improvements
are all very good l IN their way, and il may become a
question whether IL would not be good policy Tor tins
country to borrow SJ00.OOO, or whatever sum may
be considered necessary for internal Improvements.
No country ever had TO regret %borruwing money judi
ciously spent in internal Improvements ; it Is debts
for war and other unprOductive expenditures that are
- ruinous. | venture to think, therefore, for all the
above reasons, that the necessity for these improve
ments need not, and ought not to interfere with the
question Of establishing ut once steam communication
with San Francisco What internal Improvements
will it prevent? Not one. On the contrary, any one
who really wants internal improvements cannot do
better than vote for the subsidy, for n frequent, rapid
and regular steam communication with San Francisco
will be just the very thing of all others that will
almost force them upon the people and on the Gov
eminent. When the drivers of this vehicle get their
new team hitched on, they hare got TO go the pace-
there can be no stop or hold on them
have sufficient confidence in the members of the
COMMITTEES of Commerce to believe that if on any OF
the more important points of the report they may con-
slider that any facts may have been Inexperienced
Ut lull u Nlt VI II bt.hli he VI w Ut
may be the right one, that they may perhaps ask
leave so to amend their report as to leave an opening
for further inquiry. Al
PSI would take this opportunity of calling
attention to the reasoning of those gentlemen who.
with an appearance" # precision in their figures.
urge the frequency of TIE trips of sailing vessels
between the 35-day tips Of the steamer rs tacilitat-
ing communication with San Francisco as much or
even more than by 4 steamer every twenty-one
days instead of every thirty-fve days.
1t is pretended that with the steamer every IS
DAYS. we should have more than two sailing de-
partures per month or "a per annum. But we
for ii is no gain to have two of them smiling on
the anne day. or within n day of each other. We
must further deduct all those sailing departures
which might come within ten days Of the sailing of
the steamer succeeding: for the average passage
being % days. they could not expect to arrive be-
fore her. Now | find that of 81 sailing departures
in 1867. six pair sailed either on the same day or
within two days of each other. Thus you have to
deduct 10 81. or say one-third, of the departures.
then take one-ffth of the balance. to reduce the "a
departures to efficient departures. One-third from
"a leaves Is. and one-fifth from l6 we will say
leaves IL efficient departures of sailing vessels in ii
year. That is to say We have Is departures that
will take % days to make the passage on the aver
age. against eight departures of the steamer that
will take l3 days-the sailing vessel departures
having no pretension to regularity. and not enabling
any one to calculate or to connect. What kind oil
a substitute is this? / assert therefore that the de
parture of "a sailing vessels a year is no substitute
whatever for a steamer every 81 days instead of 81
days. and that a steamer every ten days would en-
tirely nullify the advantage of any number of IN
termediate sailing vessels. In other words. no
number of sailing departures are any substitute
whatever for steamers at the proper interval.