The Hawaiian gazette., 1883-03-21

pied enemy the San Francisco ChFoN'oc
has taken it up ought TO make every one,
especially those in power the more ener-
getie in dealing with the lepers until by
vigorous measures the fell disease may be
stamped ont or at least eliminated from
among sound people by vigorous sys-
TEN Of segregation.
To BREAK bread with man, to accept
his hospitality, lays one under obligation
to him: there are some men from whom 1t
is impossible, for those who would respect
themselves, to accept any hospitality OF
any kind. People holding strong views
against their would-be hosts, only stultify
themselves by apparently burying the
batchet for a social moment. No matter
how alluring the entertainment may be,
those who possess the inestimable quality
of backbone viii stay away. Those who
sanctioned by their presence the late
lamenied Coronation will not be apt to be
caught again. 1t does not appear that IN
this country any distinction is drawn be
tween paying honor to the Office as opposed
TO the person. All those who have some
idea of what is due TO their own honor
will be careful to shew that there can be
no room for misapprehension again.
THosE ugly rumors about crooked trans
actions in the management of the contracts
Of the Interior Department seem to gain
rather than lose ground. They may or
may not be true, but a very simple way
out of the difficulty is before the Minister
Of the Interior: LET him return to the
proper method of advertising contracts
for public tender, and the voice of scandal.
if ii Is scandal. will be stayed No one
ever sees now that the government ask
publicly for any piece of work: the matter
is arranged in some hole and corner man
ner known only to the Minister of the In
terror and those who through Ignorance
or otherwise may be led into such trans
actions.
We are further informed that several of
the recent contracts have been drawn up
in very loose manner and that the law
adviser Of the crown has not had any op-
portunity of looking them over or Of
amending them. This again may be par
tally rumor. but It is the kind Of rrmor
that ought to be contradicted if untrue,
that ought to be most thoroughly investi-
gated if true.
From information which has come to
us from various sources We should be IN
duced to think that there was considerable
foundation for the rnmors: We moreover
have some reason for thinking that the
white members OF the Cabinet have them
selves become alarmed and that at a recent
Cabinet Meeting il was decided that no
contracts should in future be entered into
by the Minister Of Interior without the
knowledge OF his colleagues His Ex.
John T. Bush's record on Kauai is not
such rs would inspire confidence in any
one Ii rebuttal is to be given to these
rumors it must from clear proof, not from
His Excellency's known character.
4 QUESTION Of interest arose last Friday
in the Supreme Court, upon the applica
ton Of Mr.. Clarence W. Ashford to be ad-
mitted to the practice of law The Act of
1882. with reference to the naturalization
of foreigners, authorizes the Minister of
the Interior by the Kings approval, up
on the application Of any alien foreigner
who shall have been resident in the King
dom five years or more, next preceding
such application, stating his intention TO
become a permanent resident of the King
dom. to administer the oath of allegiance
to such foreigner, If satisfied that it will
be for the good of the Kingdom. and that
taxable real estate within the Kingdom.
etc The Civil Code, Sec. 1865 declares
that. The Supreme Court shall have
power to examine and admit as practition
ers in the Courts of record, such persons,
being Hawaiian subjects, of good moral
character and having tak5n the prescribed
oath of Office. as said Court may find quail
flied for that purpose"
The applicant. Mr. Ashford, Is a mem
Der of the Bar Of the Supreme Court of
Michigan and of the Superior Court of
California, graduate of the Law School
at Ann Arbor. and has come here to reside,
expecting to practice his profession. His
certificate of good moral character was
filed together with his affidavit that he Is 4
British subject The Attorney General
showed cause why the application should
not be granted, expressing personal regret
in doing so. that the statute appeared to
him TO be mandatary upon the Court to
admit only Hawaiian subjects, and that
the recent enactment makes five years
prior residence and the ownership of tax
able real estate here prerequisite to be
coming naturalized
II was argued in behalf of the APP
,.l,a,4..,,, 4l,n
tary but merely directory 1t authorizes
the admission TO the bar of Hawaiian sub
jects, but does not prohibit the Court from
admitting others who may have proper
qualifications otherwise than Hawaiian ma
tionality, nor does it make null and void
the admission of any practitioner not of
such nationality The Court has power
by statute TO make rules rs to the practice
of law in all cases not provided for by
statute. and this is such case. The pro
visions of the various treaties We're cited
TO show that a British subject cannot be
denied the right to practice law here if he
is qualified rs far rs good character. age,
and legal attainments 90. Counsel also
argued that II would be an encroachment
on the Judiciary for the Legislative power
to impose upon the judges the terms and
for admitting members to prac
tice at the bar
The opinion of the Justices on this case
Will determine whether. under the Act of
1882, the bar can be reinforced in numbers
for the next five years.
II Is to be regretted that some public
spirited man does not by taking ont writ
Of Qao Wornaato. or in some other way test
D.. .-.l:l:t.-oE L. A. - "a Il. IL