The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1886-04-07
A RejOInder.

ED. P. c. ADvERTIsER-Sir: In the
literary world it is generally considered
unwise to answer ones reviewer unless
to thank him for his corrections and sug-
gestions, but your remarks on the arti-
Gle in the Anglican Church Chronicle"
for April, entitled Socialism and Reli-
gion," impel me to a rejoinder.
am grieved to see that you dissent
from the views expressed in that article,
simply because I am led to infer that
you, a public and influential public in
structor, would support such men as
Hyndman, Burns & Co. in their PERM
cious doctrines.
You know enough of this country to
be aware that wave of everything that
happens in the great world reaches our
shores. We have had everything here
from revolution to a railway accident,
and at UHe time it seemed probable that
even Socialists might become strong in
the land. 1t must also be very plain to
anyone whose avocations take him into
the streets of our city at the present time
that there are many people unemployed
wandering about. Is it safe under these
circumstances to advocate such meas
ures as took place in London? Would
you, sir, like to see mob of unemployed
promenading Honolulu, and falling foul
on our stores, printing offices and public
buildings? l trow not.
There is not the least doubt but that
these uneasy, disaffected men who in
cited the unemployed in London to riot
and disorder, did 50 for their own pur
poses. That the poor people gained
something by the demonstration does
not alter the fact that they did wrong
and used unlawful means. The end
does not justify the means. Philanthro-
pists, and among these the Church of
England not least, are doing much to
alleviate the sufferings of the poor and
unemployed, and perhaps this Well
known fact had great deal to do with
the bloodless nature of the riot
But, sir, what I take issue most of all
against in your review is the application
Of the term cant to my ideas. Is it
possible that, in your opinion, no one
can advocate or deprecate anything in
the name of religion without being sus-
pected of cant, which l take to mean
hypocritical whining? l am afraid your
experience of religious people has not
been very happy, and that you are in
clined to look even on me with a suspi-
cious eye. l hope to convince you before
long that you are mistaken, if such be !
the case.
One more word to the point. Have /
you seen in any Of the English papers /
word OF commentator on the acts OF
these riotous leaders? have not. MIR. /
Punch" pilloried them, and we shall !
hear by the next mail if he did them an |
injustice They broke the law of the
land, and two wrongs never make a
right | would refer YOU to the Leices-
ter papers for another phase of this das-
tardly Socialism. l am, sir, very truly
yours, THE WRITER IN a. c. C.
I'VE do not find anything in the fore
going rejoinder to modify the point OF !.
our criticism. On the contrary, it begs
the question from beginning to end. The
fact that "Mr Punch" pilloried the
leaders of the popular uprising in Lon
don proves nothing If "Mr. Punch"
had been the leading humorist OF Jeru-
salem during the trial of the greatest OF
all Communists, ne would have illus
trated the cry OF Cruelty Him ~ raised
by the religious and respectable citizens
Of that day. Neither is the wrong inn
posed upon the masses of Englishmen by
other Englishmen answered by the fact
hat a few criminals, hanging on the
skirts OF great crowd of destitute and
hungry men, plundered few stores.
Dur view of the situation goes deeper
han the exhibition of violence. 1t goes
o the cause; to the suffering and misery