The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1872-02-14

WE are advised by our neighbor that
the peoples ticket had decided victory
over that of the Ministry" at the election
on Monday week 1t has been Waterloo
defeat for the Government candidates, .
sand it has been a more emphatic rebuke
than any the Ministry have ever received
in this city" They also inform us that
"every influence was brought to bear
money, patronage, promises, threats and
persuasion, y" but the Independent vot-
ers were proof alike against the blandish-
ments or threats ofthe Ministerial agents"
In "our" Semi Weekly of Feb. sth, we
find that The influence of the Kuokoa
and Commercial Adoertiser in espousing
the cause of the successful candidates was
justly conceded TO have been felt in this
election" This last important fact was
said to have taken place in front of the
residence of Mr. H. NJ. Whitney. The
influence of the Commercial AdcertiSer
must have been immense, for on the Sd of
February they inform us that the number
of tickets was sixteen, and that there is
no regular ticket representing any partic-
ular party, faction or princiPle'-"each
prominent candidate seems to have the
plan, or perhaps their friends have done
so for them, of putting the names Of all
the other candidates on their different
tickets. We have been interviewed as to
our favorite candidates. We consider the
following ticket as comprising the names
from among the numerous candidates put
forward, of four of the best that can be Sc
lected to represent this city in the next
Legislature:
=" A. F. Judd, Lawyer,
al o. Carter, Accountant,
al. Moanauli, Butcher,
"E Mikalemi, Farmer.
"Our readers will see that our remarks
of last week are eminently justified. This
simple remark, which is all that has ever
been said in favor of these particular can
didates, had an immediate effect upon the
election" 1--WE" only had to be inter-
viewed and give "OUR" view regard
ing the best men, and the excited popu-
lace rushed to the polls to triumphantly
bear "OUR" banner on; the only won
der being that poor Moanauli fell little
short. Even at the very moment when
GIVE" were endorsing "OUR" can
didates, there was no Irregular ticket
representing any particular party, faction
or principle but as soon as our issue
had come out, the Independent Party
sprung from the earth like "Clan Alpine's
warriors true" However, there is little |
fact which seems to have been forgotten,
for on the 9th of January "OUR issue
has it that Messrs. Judd, c. J. Lyons,
J. o. Carter and z. Poll had been nomi-
mated by the " Independents whoever
they may be-and the opinion expressed
that cit should be a strong one ticket
and well engineered to defeat the indie
pendents" So it appears that Lyons was
an Independent at that time, yet he fell
wofully astern. Why did 1--WE" go
back on Lyons
Now, reader, wouldn't you like to know
which-of the sixteen tickets was the "In-
one!-those who put them
selves in nomination or those who were
put in nomination by the immense crowd
of fifteen or twenty men and boys at
Church? Or was w. c.
Jones, Esq, right when he announced
to the public, in his address on election
day, at the Court House, that there was
no principle that he knew of except an
honest willingness to serve the people
and it was every man for himself, God
for us all, and the ID take the hindmost."