The Daily bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Hawaii]) 1882-1895, 1888-07-25

President w. r. Castle in the chair.
Roll called and absentees noted.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES.
There were six reports from
various committees, on miscellan-
eous subjects submitted to the house
and disposed of in the usual man
ner.
RESOLUTION AND BILLS.
Rep. G. Brown read first time
bill to repeal Chap. XXXIX of ses-
sion laws of 1880.
ORDER OF THE DAY.
Consideration of the veto message
vetoing the Military Bill.
The President asked shall this
bill become law Notwithstanding
the veto of the King? on this ques-
lion the ayes and noes were called.
Minister Thurston said this was
by far the most important question
that had come before the House.
Each and every ope Of you will look
back to this time and see certain
things that will make an impression
on your mind. This country has
been making history rapidly of late,
and this circumstance will be re-
membered. The reasons the King
gave are entirely irrelevent to the
| question, there is principal to-day
which we must assert or abandon
it is, shall the people be governed
by one man on by themselves, this
is the principal that is 10 be decided.
The King should represent us only
as figure head, the same as Queen
Victoria does. 1t is not an ignoble
position, but one of exaltation, and
and an immense amount of good
could be done by him. L wish to
see an independent country and an
Independent King ruling over it.
The Supreme Court has ruled that
the King has the technical right to
veto. So has Queen Victoria, but
it should not be exercise. The legis-
Iature has technical rights, one of
which is to cut off the Kings salary,
but would not that be revolution
airy act, SO the King has technical
right to the veto but it should not
be exercised except by the advice of
his Cabinet. Although we admit
that the King has the technical right
we do not admit that it should be
used without advice from his Cab-
net. We may conceived case where
the King vetoes bill without the
advice of his Cabinet, but it would
be revolutionary, and / say that the
Kings act to-day is revolutionary,
because it is contrary to representa-
tive government. We have. to de-
eide to-day what principal shall be
established. l am the Kings Min
3 lister in so far as he is my official
superior, but l am also representa-
tive of the people, and so long
as the people land the King
clash, shall support the people.
We are not here to-day to uphold
Kingly prerogatives, but to protect
our rights. | am Hawaiian and
as such represent them, and hope
to see the people govern. There
fore l urge you to assert your rights,
and vote for your personal rights as
against despotic rule, byoverruling
this veto.
Rep. Nakaleka said that the ques-
ton before the House was, shall thi;
veto he sustained or not. He ques
toned the legality of the House con
8 sidering this question under the
rules. He also made point that as
there were some members absent, il
could not be acted upon.
Rep. Kinney regretted that thu
: veto had come before the House il
, the shape it had. We are forced t
! the belief that the King has assumed
the sole responsibility of this veto,
and there is no one upon whom W.
can put the blame and make him thu
scape-goat, The King alone il
morally responsible for this act, ant
if this veto indicates the policy o
the King, then there is reason to be
lieve that other vetoes will follow
: No man can see an approaching col
4 lision between the King and thi
: House without seeing that there /
3 something wrong in the workings 0
G the Government. In the Hous