The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1900-01-09
OUR PROPOSED VOTING BASIS.

The kind of opposition which the eX-
treme Democrats in Congress will offer
TO the Cullom bill, If fairly outlined in
the published letter of Congressman
Champ Clark is wholly demagogic.
Without knowing or caring to know
aught about the conditions here Mr..
Clark declares that the proposed Terri
torial law "maximizes the almighty
dollar and minimizes the man" Vot
ing and ofiice-holding are based, he
says, not on moral worth, education or
brains but on wealth. The question is,
What is the size of his bank account?
How large is his income?"
We are not aware that the suffrage
moral worth or brains; it certainly is
not in the State which has the mis-
fortune to be represented in part by
| Champ Clark. And this reminds us
that that same State. Missouri, is the
only one in the list given in the World
Almanac which expressly DISTINGUISHES
persons IN poorhouses.' That is a
maXimization of the dollar and mini
IMITATION of the man which We cordial
ly recommend as nearer and more
appropriate subject for Mr. Clark re-
forming impulses than the proposed
Hawaiian suffrage, of the genesis and
propriety of which he knows nothing
1t is the custom of the American peo-
pie in setting up form of suffrage to
consult their own best interests so far
as those interests do not conflict with
the behests of the organic law. mol
doubt the number of INDECENT poor IN
Missouri made 1t seem advisable to eX-
cmde them from the voting privilege
which might be abused in their name
by the poormasters who control them.
If so, we'll and good. Delaware aims
at the same results by requiring that
istraton fee. Connecticut, Massachu-
setts and Mississippi have educational
tests. In Democratic Georgia no man
can vote who has not paid all his taxes
since lSii-d wealth. requirement.
that Mr.. Clark ought to attack at once.
In Tennessee the voter must have paid
his poll tax. If any one of these States
felt the need, for it's safety, of fixing
a more severe property qualification for
voters than that of Mr. Clark's State
they would unhesitatingly do so and
would not be hindered therefrom by
the Federal Constitution.
But the organic law proposed for Ha
wall Is by no means the thing which
the Bowling Green statesman de-
scribes. Any male citizen of the Unit
ed States, p years old or over, who
has paid his taxes and can speak, read
and write the English or Hawaiian
language may vote for Representative
.Iere. The only "pandering" to
wealth" appears in the qualifications |
of voting for Territorial Senators and |
this is a very moderate sop indeed to
the Cerberus of millionairedom. One
must only possess $1,000 worth of
real property in the Territory or
have earned or otherwise re-
ceived not less than 5000 in the
preceding twelvemonth to enjoy
the privilege OF the whole suffrage
This 5000 clause may look large to a
Missouri man. Perhaps in that out-at-
elbows State half the population would
go to the wall If required to show proof
OF an income even less than 81 per day
but not so in Hawaii. Any white man
who really wants to work can earn
81 per day without half trying. So can
his wife, We have hackmen in Homo