The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1900-11-01
MR. MACFARLANEs EXPLANATION

Mr.. Macfarlane complains that the
Advertiser, although giving his speech
In full in another column, commented
editorially upon certain of the senti-
ments expressed by him.
An editorial is not the place for quot
ing a whole speech when that speech
IN given entire elsewhere in the same
paper.
The meat of the sentiment expressed
Nv Mr.. Macfarlane was that voters
should elect Prince David. because he
represented the monarchical idea" and
second. that they should vote for him
to show that Hawaiians resent the OUT
rage perpetrated upon them by annex
alton.
These two sentiments were selected
from a number of other choice gems
and referred to editorially.
Mr.. Macfarlane complains that in the
editorial he was quoted as having
stated that the outrage had been COM
raitted by the United States. whereas
he said that 1t was committed by the
tinted States through the Republican
party. 'n
This Is splitting hairs. The charge is
against the United States. The medium
through which II acts cuts no figure in
she matter. ,4
As a matter Of fact, every man In this
country who knows how to reaS and
write. knows that among the strongest
annexationists were leading Demo-
Gratis, and that annexation could not
rave been consummated but for Demo
cratic votes.
Mr.. Macfarlane Is welcome however
20 all the comfort and satisfaction that
lie can get out OF his explanation. The
fact remains that he. an American
citizen. running for an office created by
annexation. appealing to American
citizens possessing the franchise
through annexation. specifically asks
their votes for the purpose of proving
that by annexation the United States
Government perpetrated an outrage.
Not content with this. and not con-
tent to allow to pass by in silence thai
which the Advertiser had not referred
to editor.ally. ne reiterates over his
own signature that he wants Prince
David elected las a singing rebuke
to william Mckinley In particu
lsr for the damnable outrage he has
committed" Are Mr.. Macfarlane'.
party and the other candidates on tn,
Democratic ticket ready to stand by
\ this deciaration7
william Mckinley Is now the Presi
dent of the Government of this country
and the Overwhelming indications arr
that he will continue to be so for foul
years more.
Under these circumstances will IL no
be the height OF folly to elect marfrtC
go to Washington, the very appearance,
Of whose face there is intended to be q
"stInging rebuke" and a standing In.
dictment against the President for hav
ing committed a "damnable outrage?'
Is II not a foregone conclusion that
whatever little influence Prince DaviC
ght have possessed in Washington
these mouthings. uttered without re
bike in the presence of the leaders o.
hat party, will destroy that little?
There are a few people in this coun
try. and Mr.. Macfarlane appears to b,
one Of them, who have yet to learr
that the object of an election is to &C.
complish something in the future
heir policy Is like that of dog who
after gnawing all the meat off bone
buries IL, and then at periodic intervals
| Digs II up and gnaws and growls over
the tissueless morsel for the sheer
pleasure of gnawing and mounting.
Mr.. Macfarlane Is a worthy represen.
tative of the Democratic party, in the
particular wherein It differs most fron
the Republican party. The former de.
votes itself to denouncing and chewint
over old dead issues. while the latter Is
busy with the future and constructive
legislation that will be beneficial e
future as well as present generations