Hawaii holomua = Progress. [volume] (Honolulu) 1893-1895, 1894-02-13

cisely the same srithmetical figures
were these former revolutions
more sanguinary than this latest
impending one. The legislature on
that l4th Of January was to close
It's work: and So legislatures were
deereed biennial under the existing
Constitution, no opportunity to
vote out the Cabinet which had
just come into power, By superse-
dure Of the Wilcox ministry the
day bef r, Could psss by ocear
before May. 1894. unltss the Qg-s a
conyoked special session. GOV
eminent might now prove for a
long time sufficiently stable. but it
was not stability SIS reformers and
foreign element wished for: thew
were bitterly disa ppointed over the
III luck which had rotAted their
favorite ministers out OF office on
the 18th; and to add TO their mort
fled disgust. the new ministers.
fulfilling pledges probably given to
that queer combination of legisla-
ture, majority which had just
helped them into power, laid the
opium and lottery bill before the
Queen and advise her TO approve.
Not caring to interpose her own veto
at this time, and yet. indifferent
personally to these bills. as she mas
since testified. or, disliking them,
like most of her woman friends.
she affixed her SIGNATURE The
legislature was proro5ued with
ceremonial formality on Saturday
noon; most of the opposition mem
bers, however. being conseicuously
absent. Minister Stevens. who had
just returned from a brief trip
among the islands. joined the diplo-
matte corps at the government
house just about adjournment, to
ascertain what bills had been
royalty approved, and when in
formed that the lottery bill was one
of them, he struck his cane on the
ground and exclaimed with angry
emphasis that this was an Insult to
the United States.
The Queens new ministry, now
apparently launched upon long
term of service. was not really
disreputa bic, but of that easy shift
less character, rather, that sails
with the current. Samuel Parker
was minister of foreign affairs;
William I'll. Cornwell, of finance;
John F. Colburn, of the Interior;
A. P. Peterson. attorney general:
politicians all of them, aud men Of
parts, though loosely accused OF
having gained their power by cor
ruption and bribery. Each had
race and political affiliations of his
own with the white party, and was
by no means inclined to break alto
gether with the reformers.t But the
Queen herself, having yielded her
signature thus readily to their
approved measures. for which she
cared so little. had now their unit
ed signatures to ask in return to a
document on which her own heart
was set. Urged by various petitions
of her ON n loved people from time to
time, and inclined 10 please them.
but III practical defiance of the
whole foreign elementshe nominally
ruled, and with monstrous self
reliance, she now produced a new
Constitution, fully drawn up,
which she wished to proclaim at
once as the supreme law of the land
in place of the existing Constitution.
This was not so revolutionary as
one may suppose. That character
of 1887, as | may here remark.
drafted by Americans and full of
our own familiar expressions Of
individuals rights. Is by no means
the document proposed to follow it,
except for those essential provisions
which had reduced native influence
and her own so greatly; and here
she meant reaction to the condition
just prior to 1887. As a royal
veto was now but qualified one.
she proposed to make it absolute.
As the appointment of the mobiles
had now oeen vested in
electors with property qualificat-
ion flvoring the non-naturalized
race, she now proposed restoring
such appointment to the crown.
As the two houses of legislation
had been artfully balanced by an
equality of numbers, so as to give
the mobiles almost the preponder-
aace for voting out any ministry,
she now proposed to double tue
number of representatives in the
other chamber. She proposed tax
ing away the life-tenure of the
judieiary.-the departments. of all
others, which had proved the
steady balance-wheel; and finally
as the most sweeping change of ali,
that property qualifications should
be reduced, and that only subjects
should vote.1
Such changes of themselves must
have seemed appalling and revo-
lutionary; but the right of the
monarch to proclaim a new Con-
stitution followed strict precedents
of this jurisdiction. Neither the
revolutionary Constitution of 1887.
nor that under which the Hawai-
ian islands had been previously
governed for twenty-three years,
had sought a plebiscite. or ai,y