The Daily bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Hawaii]) 1882-1895, 1889-04-04
A MODERNER VS.. p. C. A.

EDITOR BULLETIN THE "P. G.
A." Of April Sd has an answer TO
my article headed Repeal that
Law" and it has seemingly taken
the writer, some time and untold
labor to produce an apparent con-
Trajectory effect upon the few lines
l wrote, it might crafty him if l
in my turn point out again that
which he very shrewdly omits to
notice. He charges me first with
being incapable of making fair state
ments of facts, secondly of not con-
tining myself to legitimate infer
ences from my assumed premises,
and thirdly not avoiding the con-
spicuous exhibition of petty preju-
dice or personal spite.
To cut this part short, / will just
state here that for the first time dur
ing my long sojourn in these Islands
have to experience the mortifica-
tion of having underestimated the
stupidity of the ''P. G. A."
The first argument this self-con-
ceited labyrinth of knownothingism
puts out as his picket guard is that
do not "offer a scrap of evidence
in support of the proposition that
other countries have no such law. l
will ask, what in the name of "when
you know how its done" have we to
do with other countries? Who in
tended to say anything at all about
the laws of other wationalitles? Did
l even pretend Ia say anything about
any law eXcepi this antediluvian
fossilated worm tunneled and anti
quated production of juris prudence
and Hawaiian Legislature?
The fact that it was framed ant
enacted only 3 years ago does no
make it one bit more modern or les
ancient, barbaric or obnoxious t,
civilization. Besides it is olde
than 8 years.
Concluding his first paragraph
and G and A says: "the question
at issue on the trial being, not th
merits of the law in any way, bu
whether, in this particular instance
it had been violated"
Again, did 1 infer that this wa
not so? Only, while not denyin
the violation of the law, l argue'
solely upon its merits.
Then comes this trinity an
mouthpiece of Papas, Cousins an
Anpfo uitb rnHlaI hr;stla, of IA;
porcupinal coat and vouchsafes in
dignantly defence of the "opiati
probaoscis" which was so dutiful i
its success. Friend, do not weep
the surveyor is yet alive! He die
hard with opium in sight. The
comes this quotation ="
One man on board hides one tin @
one thousand tins of opium on tn
vessel ct does not matter). Th
ship is searched, the drug is found
consequently the ship reverts to til
Hawaiian Government. The "F
G. A." claims that 'the foregoing
is an altogether incorrect and mis-
leading statement" l deny thi
fatty. If my good brother ha
quoted my next paragraph, whicI
he very cunningly drops out of ex
istence, he would have had the key
note of the whole business in shor
all the facts he needed to prove thi
law impracticable, oppressive, rid
culous and matchless nonsense.
Will the advertiser" deny tina
a sailor worth a bag of dirty clothes
a quid of tobacco, and the effects G
a booze upon his countenance, can
not "hide" one tin of opium within
this law in such way as TO hay
the ship libelled? Will you den,
the impossibility of either owners
masters or officers to check any sucl
proceedings? In view of this i'm
possibility ask again will any ma
tion see her ships confiscated through
the instrumentality of a Law which
on the part of those mostly in
terested, is impossible to conform
tpY