The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1890-05-27

| OOOo lOO CACluuC d UOUdl WdnG D
the capacity to think straight, t.
exercise sound judgment, and /;
little charity, and that man in the
defense of imaginary ideals, may
ruthlessly trample on the rights
and reputation of his fellow crea
lures.
Possibly this is one of Natures
compensations by which Gin order
not to make affront too much oul
common clay) she has deprived the
distinguished author of f" Prince
Otto CT the ordinary discernment
moderation, justice and charity
which she dispenses to average
mortals. Certainly this Seems
hardly an extravagant inference
from a letter as wanting as well
may be in all these qualities.
We are.not concerned here with
the truth of falsity of the allega-
ton with regard to Father Damien,
nor with the source from which
DR.. Hyde obtained his information
Git was probably not in a bar
ROOM. Those were matters for
Mr.. Stevenson, if he could but have
seen it. We are simply calling at
tention to the gratuitous character
OF the assumptions on which the
whole fabric of insult and detrac-
ton is erected. 1t may be an
swered that Mr. Stevenson contends
that, true or false, DR.. Hyde was
barred from making any comments
on the character of member of a
rival faith. Mr.. Stevenson does
certainly make this contention, and
does so with a vast display of rhe-
toric and fine indignation. We can
only say that this is establishing
censorship over private CORES
pondence which would probably be
as little tolerable to its proposer as
to the rest of the world. DR.. Hyde's
letter was written in reply to the
inquiries of private correspon
dent. Most men would say that he
was entirely justified in making
any reply which the facts Justify,
even though such reply might be
very fatal to the self erected idols
of romantic idealist. Mr.Steven-
son may have another morality
which possibly he lives by. We
are very willing to believe SO. But
it will not do for US, and we con-
fess to an inclination to classify it
among the romantic vagaries of
sentimentalist, than to regard it as
a fruitful contribution to morals.
1t is impossible to follow Mr..
Stevenson in detail. L have not the
charm of style which reconciles his
readers to six columns without any
content beyond variation in terms
of abuse. As a literary philippe
his letter very justly commands
our admiration. Unfortunately it
happens to be an Infamous libel |
as well. The name of Stevenson
will give it wide currency, while
denials will be forgotten.
Mr.Steyenson has two grievances
against DR.. Hyde on which he |
never wearies of enlarging. One
is that the doctor has never visited
MOlokai. He forgets that DR.. Hyde
is not an author, and that there
were in his case no motives of liter
airy curiosity to overcome the natu-
raj repugnance which even dis
authors feel to witness
ng the suferings of their fellow
creatures. The other grievance is
hat DR.. Hyde lives in comfort
able house. He evidently thinks
hat the religious are dedicated to
18th and misery in their own per-
sons, and is shocked at the specta-
lie of a Christian minister living in
modest comforts.
This sentiment is perhaps sur
-ival of a strictly orthodox ances-l
ry and training, and if so is the
'nly one which Mr. Stevenson's
ong letter has to show. The saw
ge intolerance which it displays
would have offended even John
AnoX. We mistake. Mr.. Steven
on covers one frailty with a broad
Mantle of charity, the frailty of in
ontinence. This is a tolerance,
-owever, which would have com
nended itself to Knox even less
han the implacably presenting
Elm in which the letter is other
Use composed. We conclude that
lr. Stevenson has inherited the in
olerance of his ancestors; his char. 6
y is his own.
1t would be tedious to follow this
,tter further in detail. We have
indicated its strength {
nd its weakness. As the common
Try on facts which it pretends to
e, it is a thousand times worse
ian worthless. As a piece of the
ental history of Mr. Robert Louis |