Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1896-03-18
of annexation. Zap


With regard to the opium ques-
ton, he might be regarded as a
hereto by many of his friends for
his views. He did not admit the
assertions sometimes made OF the
large part the opium license bill
had in producing the overthrow
of the monarchy. Itcertainly did
not have great influence on his
action. AS matter of fact, he
did not vote against the bill in the
Legislature of 1892. What had
more influence than the signing
Of the bill itself with himself and
others was the manner in which
the bill was passed. They saw a
number of members come over
from the palace, with leis around
their necks, to vote for the bill.
He did not consider that financial
considerations should cut a figure
in the settlement of the question.
Opium was an unmitigated evil.
with which our race was very little
acquainted. It was different from
liquor in that respect, as vast
proportion of our race had been
accustomed to liquor from time
immemorial, and would continue
to be so for time immemorial.
The speaker told of the evil effects
of an opium license here score
of wears ago, when not few men
of his acquaintance were wrecked,
most of them being now dead. He
did not agree with the theory
sometimes preached, that the ma
tives could look out for them
selves. The natives were with us,
and would continue to live here.
They were not going to leave the
country, which was their home.
Their interests were therefore in
our keeping, and anything that
would do them harm ought to
be prevented from introduction.
There was no question that under
license the use of opium would
become comparatively common
among the natives as well as
whites. 1t was therefore an evil
that should be stamped out with
all the persistence and energy
possible. On the other hand,
the advocates OF license for opium
point to the public scandal of vio-
lations of the prohibitory law.
Yet it was certain that, TO large
extent, tile prohibition of opium
did prohibit. There might be
more stringent provisions added
to the present law. For instance,
if man was fined 5000 for the
first offense of opium smok-
ing, and sent out of the country
! for a second one, the traffic would
be greatly curtailed. Ii an offend.
er was giving the option of leav.
ing the country, rather than pay
ing heavy fine or going to jail,
the probability is that the number
of opium smokers in the country
would be reduced in one year by
about five thousand. Yet, under
the present law, the extensive vio-
lation of the law made a weighty
argument ia favor of license. A
policeman or a customs guard get
ting $40 month would hardly be
accused of being great villain
with a scared conscience If he
took 5000 to make him look the
other way occasionally. When
people saw the police court block
ed with opium cases, and only
occasionally a principal brought
up with round turn, it had @
tendency of habituating the com
munity to the violation Of law
which had a most demoralizine
influence. Yet, when all was said
his conclusion was the same as in
the matter of liquor, that it was
best to leave the question Of
opium just where it stood, an6
keep the community united on the
common aim Of annexation to the
United States.
Mr.. Towse, editor Of the Star
was called upon as substitute fol
Mr.. Robertson. He said it wai
an honor to be considered as
substitute for a man like Mr.
Robertson, who had distinguished
himself by saying in the Legisla
ture that a public Office was sof
snap. Making an allusion to tn,
anniversary Of st. Patrick, h
spoke of the gathering in that hal
in December, 1898, when it wa
decided to stand together if the U
S. S. Philadelphia's forces were
l.LAl.