The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1889-04-30

Justice" knows he did not, or else
Justice" is an idiot. Every Ha-
waiian, poor or rich, holds all the
power of electing our Legislators
that he ever had; and the man that
says otherwise knows that he is bear
ing false witness.
Further, so far from the present
Constitution having diminished the
Hawaiians' right of suffrage, it has
materially extended it, and that in
two directions. In the first place,
the native Hawaiian is now enabled
to take part in the election of mobiles
on the same conditions as other men,
a new right and privilege which he
never possessed before. That which
was formerly the sole preregative of
the King, is now the right of every
citizen who possesses the moderate
income of six hundred dollars per
annum. And this right is enjoyed,
as it should be, irrespective of the
circumstance of the voter being a
Hawaiian or white man.
The other extension of the fran
chise, and it is an important one,
is in the abolishing of a pro
perty qualification by which the
former Constitution limited the right
to vote for representatives. Now
every native of twenty years old and
upwards can vote for representatives,
whether he has any property or not.
a thing he could never do before.
Thus we see that the new Constitu-
rion, so far from robbing the Ha-
waiian OF any part of his franchise,
has materially enlarged it.
To the authors of the new Consti
tuition, the subject of the House of
Mobiles presented very serious
problem. The new system required
the choice of the mobiles to be taken
away from the Sovereign. To sub
ject the election of the mobiles, ike
that of representatives, to universal
suffrage, would be to make the
mobiles substantially the same as
representatives, and so practically
abolish them as q separate institu-
ton. The object, if any, of havinga
class Of Legislators distinct from re
pTesentatives, would be to secure q
more conservative influence than
universal suffrage would be likely to
give. 1t having been thought best
not to make so radical change as
that Of abolishing the mobiles, their
election was committed to the small
property holders, and those posses
sing an income far within the aver
age of mechanics wages. This was
q change in the popular direction,
but not to the full extreme of an
suffrage. To represent
it as robbery of the Hawaiian's
rights, is simple faIsehood and
maIignity
The origin and true animus of
this kind of talk is more evident
than its authors probably suppose.
The cloven foot is quite conspicuous,
and the beast to which it belongs is
no great mystery. We have here
merely the kick of certain interested
parties against the fact that the
franchise has been largely
that the choice Of mobiles
has been taken from the King, and
that full equality in voting has been
given to foreigners. It must be re-
membered that everywhere else
where white men run the whole busi-
ness and commercial affairs of
country, as they do here, they also
run the government. It does not
seem unreasonable that the white
man here should ask as much, and
no more, than equal rights of suf
trage with the natives. Those who |
Try to stir up i'll will on that account
are On the wrong course. They may
do some injury to the pub
lie interests, but they cannot possib- |
y secure the power and other adyan-
-ages they covet for themselves.
The purpose and effect Of the
present Constitution has been the
of irresponsible power, |
and the enlargement OF the political
rights Of the people. In this en-
both natives and foreign
srs have shared. Those who deny |
that fact are eitherwoefully ignorant !
u WiLfUIly dishonest.
l--71lr-s-- -