The Daily bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Hawaii]) 1882-1895, 1884-09-03

ccdurc, there is something seriously
ut fault in our constitution. What
makes the case utterly incXplicahlc,
in the light of anything that could
he called responsible government. is
the fact that some of the vetoed
Acts were supported, If not intro
duced, by Ministers themselves.
Unless, i'm the case of these or even
Of any of the measures, His Ma
icsty was able TO show his Ministers
that the Cnactmcnts were ut variance
with any point of the constitutions
the Ministers are simply in the posi-
ton of advisers of the Crown whose
advice has been rejected, and If
they estimated the dignity of their
positions or the interests of the
Kingdom one iota above the emolu-
ments and social honors pertaining
to their offices, their designations
would have taken place in the hour
and a half between the announce
ment of the veto and prorogation.
Some confusion has doubtless been
created in the minds of many people
by recent discussions, rs to where
the responsibility of government lay
under our system. 1t seems to us
that the responsibility of the Min
isters has been too much neglected
in the able discussions of royal
privileges which have taken place in
these columns. The Ministers are
necessarily responsible to the Legis-
lature, for they cannot administer
affairs without its concurrence. A
rejection of the Appropriation Bill
by the Assembly would render them
helpless to carry on affairs, and the
rejection of their other important
measures would seriously hamper
them. On the other hand they are
responsible by the constitution for
the acts of the Sovereign, whose
confidence is at the same time indis-
pensablc to their remaining his ad-
yisers. but that confidence must
be supposed to be inspired
by the fact of the popular approval
of their actions or course rs signified
through the Legislature. Let us
caution the reader that we are not
discussing the merits of our consti-
tutional system or its abuses in any
quarter. What we have been coming
to in the foregoing is that the Minis
try, by their ability to carry through
the Appropriation Bill and to carry
out their policy in general, have
shown that they control a majority
of the Legislature. Upon the strength
of that fact we have seen claimed
for them the continued confidence Of
His Majesty, and upon that ground
they must be held responsible for all
the legislation effected. Being there
fore responsible on the one hand for
the acts of the Legislature, and on
the other hand for the acts of the
King, it is impossible that they can
have the confidence Of both the Leg
islature and the King at the same
time in the case we are considering,
where II large volume of legislation
effected under their control and res
possibility is summarily nullifed by
the royal veto. The only possible
view of the matter to take, therefore,
is that the King has snubbed his
advisers and thus made their retire
ment the only dignitied course open
to them, or that the Ministers have
been traitorous to the Legislature in
return for its confidence in them. If
they have tacitly approved of legis-
lation and helped in effecting it, and
then advised the King to annul it,
they have been guilty of treason
toward the people as represented in
the Legislature. That the Legisla-
ture did not demand an explanation
of His Maiesty's advisers on the
spot, when the announcement was
made of the notification, without
cause shown, of nine Acts solemnly
perfected by it, simply shows how
feebly the pulse of freedom beats in
onr body polite at this moment.
A HORRIBLE REVELATION.