Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1915-10-29
WARD SYSTEM FINALLY DOWNED;
ACHPS AMENDMENT IS CARRIED

vi lllio lIuptHtdul HcdSNES HOT IdEPs
than Monday night. -: ~... ..:..
The convention passed through l.
3ections Ct the charter last night. the
most notable progress which il has so
far made, and the session was adj
journed to continue at 1880 O'Clock to,
night. = 3.-... pa.
Collegiate Owens Position. ~s-~ -.,..
Delegate C. C. Owen objects to has
ing his action on Wednesday evening
classed by the minority leaders as a
"blunder." when he believes he took
the only fair course to all. He fully
explains his position in the following
a lively rap at Senator Chillingworth:
Honolulu, T. H.. Oct. 30. 1915.
Editor Honolulu Star-Bulletin. .--.
Sir:-From an article published iB
your last nights edition | most Ger
tafnly object to an attempt being made
to prove someone the goat for failure
OF the progressive minority of the
charter convention to carry out an I'm.
fair parliamentary trick. Had the vote
carried to prevent further considera
ton of Section S of the majority draft
as amended by Senator Achi the &C
ton of those of US who gave our eff
forts to obtain short ballot form OF
city administration would be as I'm
fair as some Of the tactics attempted
in the early days of the convention by
the ward-system devotees. AS lasl
nights session proved, Senator Achi's
amendment was voted for as a fair
compromise measure, and the conven
tion can thank those members who
voted against Mr.. Chillingworth's dou
.ble-faced motion and thereby passed
the six-supervisor measure without
having to be accused ofatrickery
Respectfully, s4t1
as fc &C. G. OWEN.
Tactics Defended, fs4.7is ssssss,::.ssr,a
{ In support OF Senator Chilling
worth's tactics, the following letter
was written by Attorney r. W. Brock
ons to Chillingworth:
Honolulu, Hawaii, Oct. %, 1916.
Honorable Charles F. Chillingworth,
Honolulu, HAWAII.
Ny dear Charley: Noticing criti-
cism of you in the paper of this morn
ing, l thought 1t might be OF interest
to you to know that the course pur-
sued by you in moving reconsidera-
ton rs one which is rearly always fol-
lowed in Congress In the case of bills
which have finally been, passed over
opposition. Indeed, ii Is very rare. to
find a case in the House where there
has been a roll call ON the passage of
the blu, that the motion to reconsider
Is not made =
could multiply all sorts of illustra-,
tions for you, but only al few will be.
necessary. s.s ,4srf. 80 IS s, !,
On March 8, 1915, q question which
had been much debated AROSE as to
whether the report of tie conference
committee on the agricultural appro-
priation bill should be adopted. The
chairman on the apBFppriation bill
was Mr.. Lever He won, out, eon his
scrap and had the conference commit
tee; agreed to. / find this entry; fol-
lowing the announcement of the vote;
On motion of Mr.. Lever. the motion
to reconsider the vote Hy which the
conference report was agreed to- was
laid on the table. tfs,g q 4 !, =
On the same day there was present
ed q neutrality resolution, Mr.. Under
wood being the gentleman handling
the resolution. { 1t vas riIfsiiy adopted,
with the Senate amendme nts.. Then
! find this entry:
"On motion of Mr.. Underwood. a
motion to reconsider tie vote by
which the Senate amendments were
concurred in was laid on the table"
~ have quoted but two cases, but if
the methods employed by you IN. NOV
ing to reconsider be attacked as un-
usual, can quote you thousands. AS
q matter of fact, If the question at
issue was a vital one-which judge
from the papers, it was--T should
have pursued exactly the same tao
tics that you did. .' 81
imagine the trouble was that your
delegates did not understand the mo-
ton. and If INDUCED in any criticism
at all it would be that you did not
fully post them on the subject. I
Very sincerely yonrs, r : r. " -: 1
slH RI w BRECKONSl f. !.