The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1903-12-07
THE TOWN MEETING.

and subject to reasonable limits of
time, and his ability to hold the atten-
ton of the meeting, had his say on the
public matter for which the meeting
was called. The moderator presided
and kept the speakers and the meeting
party politics did not enter into the
discussions. Good Democrats and
good Republicans were found on the
same side, or opposite sides, according
as they were personally concerned in
the issues of opening a new road, for
instance, or building new school
The election of assessors, "selectmen,"
and SO on.
Public notice was given in the call
for a town meeting of the questions
to be discussed, and no other matter
could be takenSup. To capture" such
meetings with resolutions arranged
beforehand, for which speakers were
provided, with chairman who would
declare the vote and promptly declare
the meeting adjourned was not in the
program.
In Hawaii we hope to see more and
more public expression of the opinions
of our citizens in matters of general
interest. Bodies, such as the Mer-
chants Association and Chamber of
Commerce, can do much to formulate
plans, but all public bodies and all
party committees must have the pub
lie behind them in order to accomplish
successful results.
The town meeting" tonight at Prog
ress Hall ought to be attended by all
citizens who can CO. The subject
announced for consideration is a broad
one-the County Act. It includes va
rious phases, for example:
Does the meeting approve or disap-
prove of attempting to secure the re-
enactment by Congress of the County
law?
Does the meeting approve or disap-
prove of promoting All early test case
or cases to secure a final decision by
the local Supreme Court as to the va
lidity or invalidity of the County act?
If an appeal is to be made to Con-
gress, shall it be made before or after
test case has been heard by our
Supreme Court?
There is no question of Executive
policy or party politics involved in
these questions
There should be no cut and dried
program arranged for.
The questions are practical ones up
on which good citizens may, in good
faith, disagree.
Whether individual citizens were
original county bill supporters or
whether they were, or still are, doubt
ing Thomases, cuts no figure in the
present discussion.
We are faced by a condition. For
several reasons doubt has been cast
upon the validity of the County Act.
This doubt should be removed as
promptly as practicable in the interest
of stability and orderly government.
The sole question for immediate con-
sideration is how to remove it the most
speedily and with the least possibility
of injurious after effect.
The Advertiser has already expressed
its opinion that it is in the best in
terest OF the Territory to make UP a
test case and secure an early hearing
before the local Supreme Court. There
are no after claps nor unknown posi-
bilities back of this method. The
court will decide that the act, as a
whole, is valid, or that it is invalid. If
1t decides in favor of validity, that
ends It, and the county officers will go
on about their business.
If it decides that the act is invalid,
we can let matters take their course,
or call an extra session, or an appeal
can then be made to Congress as we'll
as prompt results: for there is not
even remote probability that Con-
gress will act in the matter before the
Christmas vacation. Even unanimous
consent would scarce secure such ra-
pidity of action, and there is the GER
tainty that Japan will protest vigor-
ously against Congress enacting a law
which prohibits japanese from driv-
ing a hack in Hawaii unless he can
speak English.
Unless we. want Congress to give US
a County Act of its own making-and
some openly advocate leaving the mat
ter entirely to Congress-we do not
want the subject to go before Congress
at all, for once that body takes the
matter in hand there is no knowing
what will become of the act, or in
what shape it will emerge.