The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1873-01-04

The only pretense Of an argument for TIE
legality Of the Decree, is in the existence Of a
few official oaths and in the fact that '. it was 30
1t, and laws, elections and the whole administra-
ton Of the government have since gone along
under it's provisions " but chiefly in the Obso-
lete and deeayed creed Of the divine right Of
kings. 1t is well known that the people have
never acquiesced in the acts Of Kamehameba v.
on taking the Throne; and that their almost
unanimous feeling from that day 10 this, partially
smOthered though it may have been, has been a
strong and unceasing protest against those acts
Kanehamcha V. in taking the Throne had but
one condition requisite by the Constitution, the
one Of blood; he was not appointed and pro-
claimed by the reigning King and the House of
Mobiles as the successor 10 the Throne; he was
not chosen as such successor ''by the House of
Mobiles and the House of Representatives in joint
ballot Thus, by the argument Of the Gazette,
his acts in taking the Throne and rromulgating
his Decree in place Of the Constitution were
" illegal, unconstitutional and void, - and were so
with far greater force than could be the act of
the King elect in recognizing a rightful Constitu-
ton which has never been interfered with save by
such unlawful proceedings, even though it has
been set aside for nine years.
The Gaelic leader is an Industrious attempt
to sustain and give an appearance of right to a
false position, and it fails not for want of ability
in the writer, but because he attempts what is
logically and morally impossible. A weak appli-
cation of the doctrine Of expediency, shows from
beginning to end. 1t is a feeble endeavor to prove
that a wrong may be righted by continuing it.
From a commOn-sense, straightforward view of
present circumstances, it does not appear that the
King elect will really need any validity for his
acts which the provisions of the late Kings De-
cree might give him. What does the voice of the
people mean, which on the first of January rung
out an overwhelming call to LUNALILo, King elect
of the nation by its unanimous reclamation from
Hawaii to Nihau? Does this give no legitimacy!
Then where will you look for it? In the present
crisis, if authority comes not from the people.
where in the name Of Justice and Right does it
come from? From the Decree of 1864? Heaven
forbid. If ths King elect and the people who
have elected him shall unitedly decide TO restore
their old much wronged Bill Of Rights, and thus
10 rebuke the dangerous and revolutionary acts of
the last reign, we do not know how their acts
under this policy could be made stronger, juster
or more really Legitimate. Can the election of
the first OF January be called invalid, or its re-
be doubted? The judges Of election were
selected by the people themselves-who shall dis
trust or find fault if the people do not? The
nation sat in Committee of the Whole, and there
the important vote took place that makes WILLIAM
LUNALILo KING The Legislature Will of
course follow the direct vote of the people by way
Of formal ratification, and this they do without
affecting their obligations to the Decree of 1864.
The fear expressed in the article under review.
If the Constitution Of 1852 should Be re-
stored % there would be no one who could legally
enforce it,, must be founded chiefly in the writer's
remarkable veneratiOn for the Decree which over
rode it. Cannot the King elect enforce it, and if
not, why not? If a feeling of conscientious obi
cation to the acts of the late reign should necessi-
ate a resignation on the part of present officials,
shall prevent the King from Immediately
ssuing commissions making new ones, and who
hall say that such commissions are not valid OF
hat such new officials would not be duly author
zed?. As TO the statute laws which have been
enacted during the years that have elapsed since
he suspension of the Constitution in 1864, one
Jingle statute passed by the Legislature will
egalize them all.
The tempOrizing policy of the Gazette leader
las too long been the bane of our politics. The
inconsistency of the argument exposes itself in
he positive avoidance of any discussion of the
question on it's merits,-the only true basis of
Judging any and every question under the sun;
lot a single fundamental principle is brought for
Yard; departure from the Decree of 1864 is con-
emned as )" fraught with peril to the liberties of
he people, as If by the enforcement of that
)ecree more liberties of the people were not lost
han by all other influences together, since their
was established
The nation is wearicd of the late regime, and has
OF and will not ratify its principles. The King
has publicly acknowledged the liberal idea
f government by the consent of the governed,
nd the people in response have rallied with I'M
recedented enthusiasm and made the principle
national policy, and its princely supporter
King. And now any support of the policy
T the past reign is out of sympathy both with
DPular sentiment and political morality and
nstice.
THE ppTNrE 9