The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1900-09-05
SENATORIAL NOMINATIONS.

-piece-club." 1t is the kind of politics
that would be expected from Turk and
Lewis.
1t has nothing to commend it, but the
determination of a faction of the party,
temporarily in control of the machinery
of the party, to gain an advantage from
the manipulation of the machinery,
which it could not expect from the free
voice Of the representatives of the whole
body of the Republican party, whose
votes alone will elect the senatorial no
minees if they are elected. 1t is an
exhibition of the worst tendencies of
party organization, at time when the
Republican party in these Islands ought
to live up to the highest principles and
traditions of the party.
Precedents are, being set now. They
ought to be right presidents.
At time of all others when the Re
publican party ought to be a party of
the voters and not of the machine, it is
proposed to introduce a Characters
tically machine innovation for the ad-
vantage, not of the party as against
the common foe, the Democrats and the
Independents, but for the personal and
political advantage of a particular set
of Republicans as against the Republi-
can party as a whole
The Island of Oahu is one senatorial
district. 1t was so under the Republic
of Hawaii. 1t was made so by congress
under the territorial act. Every voter
in the Island has the right to vote for
civ
If six Republicans senators are to be
elected from Oahu, it will be, it must be-
by the votes of the Republicans of the
whole island. Therefore every Republi-
can in the island has a right to voice
through his precinct representatives in
the Choice of the candidates for whom
he is expected to vote in November
But this machine proposition, rank with
the mal-order of intrigue and faction,
proposes that the Republicans of the
Fifth Representative district shall be
called on to vote for three senatorial
candidates in whose selection they had
no voice, or forfeit their party allie
glance and that the Republicans of the
Fourth district shall be put to the same
unfair test. 1t may be said in rejoinder
that it cannot be supposed that the Re-
publicans of one district will put up
candidates which the Republicans of
the other cannot Loyalty and enthusiasts
tically support. If that is so why in
troduce a new method? new scheme?
If the Republicans of the Fourth and
Fifth districts acting separately are
certain to put up good candidates, they
are equally certain to do it acting to-
gether. And acting together, the sena-
torial ticket when nominated, will be
the choice of the whole party in the ISL
and, and will certainly and naturally be
supported by the whole party.
But while it may be assumed as true,
that the representatives of the two dis
tricts acting together will voice the
choice of the whole party of the Island,
because that is the regular and orderly
way in which the party voices itself, it
by no means follows that the delegates
from the two representative districts
acting separately. will do the same
thing, for that is not the regular and or
derby way in which the party expresses
itself on the senatorial question. The
very fact that departure from the re-
gular and orderly way is proposed, that
the suggestion is put forward that half
the Republicans shall have no choice in
the selection of some of their candidates
gives strength and force to the doubt
whether wise selections will be made.
Either the party, or some individuals or
faction of the party must have some
thing to gain by the innovation, or the
suggestion is not worth the breath it
takes to put it forth. The party GER
tainly cannot be the gamer by disfran-
chising a portion of it in the selection
of candidates. Therefore there is only
the other horn of the dilemma, some in
dividuals or faction hope to gain some
thing by it. That alone is sufficient to
condemn it.
The result of such a procedure would
be either that bad nominations would
be forced on the party, or that many
individuals would believe that bad no
limitations had been made or attempted
Following this there would be the con-
fiict in the minds of many voters
whether, LOT the BOOu TO come from
party supremacy at this time, they
should adhere to their party allegiance,
and swallow the unpalatable nominal
tions; or, for the ultimate good of the
party, bolt the unpalatable nominations
and administer a rebuke to those who
seek through control of party machinery
to gain their own instead of their
party's advantage No doubt by far
the larger number would yield to party
allegiance. But some would not, and
that number whether large or small,
might endanger party victory. At any
rate, such proposition carried into eff
feet, must of necessity introduce dis
trust division and lack of cordial CO.