The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1889-05-21
AN INDIGNANT FRIEND OF THE
HAWAIIANS.

The occasion which has called
forth the following indignant protest
is now some days old. The particu-
lar article our correspondent refers
to has been already dealt with pretty
thoroughly in our columns. We
have, however, thought best to pub
lish the letter, not only out of regard
for the writer, but because his per
sonal qualities, as well as his wide
and varied knowledge of the country
and its people, fit him to speak wisely
and justly concerning the rights and
interests of native Hawaiians. He
writes as follows:
"MR. EDITOR: l cannot, of course,
assume to dictate rules of propriety
to the Bulletin. Neither can | re-
frain from protesting against the
impropriety of its recent conduct.
1t may have had some exceptional
reason for printing the gross and
brutal language employed by
Equity" toward Hawaiians. l am
unable to feel assured of what the
Bulletins real motive was in print
ing that letter. l am unwilling to
trace that motive in the prompt and
malignant use made of that letter by
the "Elele," which selected and re-
Dublisbed in Hawaiian the most
atrocious of its words as being the
sentiments of the ADVERTISER and its
friends. As one of that number, I
wish to record my emphatic reproba-
ton Of the imputed ideas, and of
everything resembling them. 1t
has been said that the only good
Indian is the dead Indian; so we
say, the only good Hawaiian is a
silent Hawaiian / e., one who has
no vote. Such language is not only
inexcusably brutal and insolent to-
ward the native and original pos
SCISSOR of the country and its govern
ment. 1t is also grossly offensive to |
the many friends of the native. It |
insults the intelligence and shocks |
the moral sense of good men. If |
any quasi-reputable person in Homo
lulu really holds such opinions as
Equity expressed, he should be
to keep his brutality to
himself. The newspaper that helps |
him to publish such ideas needs to
explain its conduct, and does not dis
miss responsibility by expressing
however emphatic, to such
indecent sentiments. The justice
and expediency of the native Ha-
waiians voting for their Legislators
has been thoroughly established by
time and experience. 1t is too
obviously their right, and has been
too long unguestioned, for any vim
to be needed. No one would
pretend to question it, except for a
deliberate purpose of mischief"
With the substance of the above,
We are in full accord. With the ex-
,eption of few phrases, and, as it
seems to us, a tendency to the undue
and repetition of
rong epithets, we endorse the Ian
guage as well. A newspaper dis
.laims responsibility for the language
# its correspondents. 1t under
axes to give large liberty to the ez-
preston of opinions adverse to its
,wn. But there must be limitations
o that liberty. A journal that re-
poets itself and its readers will vigi-
antly guard those limits, and will
lot permit any correspondent to
ransgress them. Profane and bias
'hemous expressions will be shut
'ut from its columns, however they
nay be allowed to garnish the con
ersation of men. Obscene terms
nd sentiments will share the same 1
ate. Language broadly and coarsely t
isparaging to classes of people held
4 any esteem, particularly if carried
D such extremes as in the case our /
correspondent refers to falls in the |
anne category of being unsuited for
ublication. 1t is not always enough i