The Daily bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Hawaii]) 1882-1895, 1884-11-21

departures from the principles Of
parliamentary government. This
kind of government is simply
gathering of the people in delibera-
tive assembly to manage their affairs
As it would he impossible to get all
the people Of the smallest country
together. or regulate them if they
could he assembled, the method OF
meeting by chosen representatives
has overcome that difficulty, and an
equitable method it is. although in
volving details that are still open
questions. If Prince Albert had
said that the peoples fitness for par
liamcn.ary institutions, was on trial,
he would have come nearer the
truth, in our opinion. Parliamentary
institutions in his day and country,
to look at his opinion in another light,
NCIC 81 ululLCldJCN VIII lIC ICSlNuN
of other kinds of government that it
was premature to pass judgment
upon them, anyhow. The system is
still in process Of development in
England, where the signs are thick
ening that the old feudal and oil
garchic elements that clog it must
shortly be eliminated A hereditary
branch Of parliament, or one not the
creation of the people, directly or
indirectly, has no part in the parlia-
mentary system by right.
Mr.. Carlylc's question as TO
whether any business would or could
ever be done by the "siX hundred
and fifty-eight miscellaneous per-
sons, watched and criticized by
twenty-soven millions, mostly
FOOLS" has been answered by history
/ gloriously in the affirmative. In spite
Of hundreds of clogs upon parlia-
mentary self-governmcnt, it has
done more for the advancement of
human welfare in the last hundred
years than all the cynical philosophy
of the period from Diogencs to
! Carlyle. There is no wisdom, at all
events, in calling other people fools,
nor in crying down every human
institution that does not display
more perfection than humanity it.
self.
Mr.. Spcncer's assertion that /" the
great political superstition of the
present is the divine right of par
liaments," must be taken in the
light of his views as to the relation
of divinity to humanity. Is he not
the leader of that philosophy which
refuses to acknowledge divine basis
for any claim of humanity? We
would not deprecate raising the
question Of whether parliamepts are
the best agencies attainable for
peoples TO govern themselves by.
But when it comes TO the question
Of whether Il people have u right to
choose that or any other form of
rule, we have no hesitation in saying
that if anything can be proved to be
Il part of the divine polity toward
men, it is that they should be given
freedom Of choice in managing their
affairs as individuals, families, tribes
and nations, certain veal to follow
their choice Of the right and woe
that of the wrong.
( Our Legislatures last session S
work, which our correspondent has
chosen to disparage in the interest
of his argument, is not n fair crite
rion Of the value of parliamentary
institutions, any more than th'
failure Of the writer of this in max
ing fortune out of a sugar planta
ton, should he try it, would prove
that cane-planting upon thest
Islands is an Improbable business
While not admitting that our Legis
latuWc's work was so wholly con
temptible as he would represent it
we consider that wherein our Legis
Iature failed was in being n parlia
ment of free, intelligent, popula
choice. If we are to be governet
from within, however, we shoul'
consider the proper advice for on
people is TO perfect rs far us posi-
ble our parliamentary system. How
ever, we shall await with interes
Mr. kpuvan's cchnnn Of action fo