The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1882-01-21

THE Gazette, enumerating some of the
disqualifications of Mr.. Gibson, in respect
to public confidence, recalls to mind Mo-
reno and Father Larkin. These two indi-
viduals are usually brought forward when
Mr.. Gibson is assaulted. Our contemporary
says "a Did he Mr.. Gibson), not speak in
the last Legislature so highly in favor of
our old friend Moreno Let him produce
the words, speaking " so highly in favor"
These are the facts. "When Mr.. Gibson was
in Washington city during the year 1869,
assisting DIR. J. Mott Smith, the Hawaiian
Charge a. AGuires to advocate the ReciprO-
city Treaty he had frequent encounters with
Signor Moreno, who was advocating before
Congress IA cable Geographic scheme. Mo-
reno was then often seen at the houses of
Mr.. Sumner and other eminent public men,
and was frequently met at the receptions of
Secretaries and Senators. Mr.. Gibson saw
much of Moreno and he had every reason
to believe then that he was II man Of means
and received a favorable consideration from
eminent public persons. Years afterwards,
Moreno wrote to Mr.. Gibson at home here,
respecting his cable scheme, and the pros
pect of its being entertained in Hawaii
and in 1880, Moreno arrived in Honolulu
from China notwithstanding their
former acquaintance and correspondence,
Mr.. Gibson did not come to town to meet
Moreno till about five months after his ar
rival here, and during this time, the plausi-
BILE and intelligent Italian had formed a
multitude of acquaintances, and a very
general opinion was expressed in favor of
his personal abilities. \ somewhat general
favor at one time, no doubt, encouraged
Moreno, to contemplate greater results to
arise from his visit to the Kingdom than
he at first anticipated. And during all this
period, and all of MOrenO's stay here, Mr..
Gibson never had any very intimate asso-
citation with him., not as much as many
others of the community. But Mr.. Gibson
voted for a subsidy for a China Merchants
Line of steamers, in which Moreno was
supposed at the time to be interested. This
is Mr.. Gibson's offence i'm connection with
Moreno. Now, Mr.. Gibson had strongly
advocated a subsidy for the Pacific Mail,
land as such subsidy had few friends among
native members, it will not be assuming
too much in saying that hir- Gibson's in
huence went a long way in obtaining that
subsidy. He then said in the Assembly
that he was prepared to advocate the grant
of aid to a F~rench-Tahitian Steamer Line,
then spoken of, should it touch at our own
port, or any other foreign line. And when
! the China steampship HO Chung arrived, it
was simply in accordance with MIR. Gibson's
expressed views ami previous action, that
he voted to assist the China Line, although
at one time he did oppose it, and not
at all in consequence of any Moreno in
huence, Moreno regarded Mr., Gibson as
| one of his worst antagonists during the ex-
citing period of August, 1880; and an in
timitate history of those events will prove
hat Mr.. Gibson was neither used nor
out-witted" by Moreno.
AS for Father Larkin, Mr.. Gibson's assO-
cation with him dates from the period
when the Father originated and circulated
a petition for the pardon or Communication of
sentence of Polua, condemned to death. Mr..
Gibson. with many Others had his sym
pathies aroused in respect to this case. But
what proof is there in that Of 'bolstering up
an adventuIern The Father came here
proposing an excellent scheme of technical
instruction, This scheme was calculated to
win the favor of all parties, unless it might
possibly promote the opposition OF our
brother editor, who is an instructor, ana
who might entertain some jealousy toward
a new system.
Mr.. Gibson had nothing to do with Lark
ms affairs and this journal merely pdb-
lished statements believed to be true, for
Larkin, as it would for the editor of the
Gazette or any one else, having a fight on