The daily herald. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1886-1887, 1886-12-22
wEpNEsDAY, pgcEMB,R q, lSso
MORE ABOUT THAT CLAUSE.


On August a7th last Mr.. Creighton,
editor of the Ad0eytiser, was Minister
of Foreign Affairs and as such occu-
pied seat in the Legislature. That
day the Oceanic steamship subsidy bill
was before the Assembly for second
reading, and the following is an extract
from the Ad5eytiSer's report of the
debate thereon:-
Mr.. Thurston moved to insert after
the word "month" the following: "Nor
unless the sailing days shall be at least
ten days apart"
The amendment carried and the
section passed as amended.
Sections 8 and 4 we're passed with
out amendment, and the bill passed to
engrossment and will be read third
time on Tuesday.
In the same issue of Mr.. Creighton's
paper that contained the above report,
the following appeared in the leading
editorial, doubtless written by the Mn,
lister of Foreign Affairs:
Arverryi,iJ Jv--,tvTvi5y
disposed of the Oceanic Steamship
Subsidy bill. The subsidy has been
fixed at $500 for each round trip,
and Tie eombany is TO desbatch a Stefiai
vesscl Of nat less Man eigJifcen hundred
Inns bn,khen J0y tie C0aSf al. k.inter0als Of
net less Than ten days. THIS is REASON
ABLE; so also is the provision in the
bill that existing freight rates shall net
be increased in the period during
which the company may draw the sub
sidy.
The emphatic characters in the fore
going quotation are ours. When Mr.
Creighton wrote those words, as he un
doubtedly did write them, he was, be
sides being the responsible editor 0
what he once boasted was 'a journa
of fact and opinion" Minister of For
eign Affairs and member eo Q6ffio 0
the Legislative Assembly. This Mr.
Creighton, when the matter in question
was rcdhot from the arena of debate
and decision, said that the ten days
clause passed and that it was treason
able" provision Does anybody not ;
born idiot imagine that the editor 0
the Adae,ziser, when holding the posi-
lions above mentioned and being a
the same time the paid Journalistic
champion of the Oceanic Steamship
Company, could possibly have beer
mistaken about the facts in the case
Such thing is too absurd to be sup
posed for one moment. Now, how
ever, we have the same Mr.. Creighton
but out of the public positions men
toned, saying, when the events in con
troversy are four months cold, that the
ten days clause was defeated, and, by
implication at least, contendinf
strongly that the provision would have
been out of all reason and an imposi
ton on great steamship owning cor
poration, intolerabe to be borne at The
hands Of a little nation like Hawaii
Which is to be believed, the Ministerial
editor of four months ago, when the
disputed matter was fresh in his mind
or the non-Mlnisterial editor of to day
who relies for support of his present
assertion on evidence that no judge
would entertain: the editor in both
cases being the same man, but making
directly opposite statements'
What more proof is required that the
ten days clause was inserted in the
subsidy bill, than the testimony Of Z
Minister Of the Crown, under his owr
hand and indited within few hours
perhaps minutes, after he had been ar
eyewitness Of the facte The only ques