Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1916-02-07
WHY so IRRITABLE?

The Hilo Tribune devotes two and one hall
columns of editorial space to a comparison OF
Hawaii and Honolulu county government, y APP.
parently with the hope of persuading itself and
Hawaii county generally that Honolulu is very
much worse mismanaged than Hawaii
In the course of hiseditoriaispur good friend
Editor j. B. MeSwanson, after quoting the
Star Bulletins statistical proof that Honolulu
supervisors haye over appropriated fla
grant manner, says: .s~-es- - a-
fsons Oahu this state Of affairs is accepted as re-
gFtttsble~ but ps not of sufficient importance to
merit more than presentation of the facts in
the Honolulu newspapers for one or two issues. Ii
a had happened Hawaii or one Of the other out
Side islands II would be subject Of vast civic
lmportance and proof that the Hawaiians are not
capable Of self government Besides this, the two
rirtnous honolulu dailies would besvoiubly demand
ling that the law be enforced, which provides fine
and jail sentence for just such oyer-approprations
BY county supervisors and other officials.
The reason for Oahu's mudded government affairs
does not have to be looked for That county rough
ridden by politicians; and the Honolulu newspapers
Of any infuence are afraid TO play up" the acts OF
the county officials for fear of bringing defeat to the
political party with which both the officials and the
newspapers aligned. oahu politicians and news
papers have still to learn that most voters in city
and county elections now their ballots according
10 indiyidual Northumberland not account of
party aniIiations)
We don't know what Mae has been feed
ing on in the way of mental sustenance hut GER
tainly it must be remarkable stuff for him to
dish up this comment as the result. The Homo
lulu press has not accepted the state of affairs
as merely 'regrettablep nor confined comment
to one or two issues. 1t was the Star-Bulletin
which dug up the law on over appropriations
and published it for the benefit of the super
visors and the county attorney, not only that,
but put the situation squarelyup to the respon-
sibe officials Nor did the Star Bulletin ever
point to the Hawaii graft expose as proof that
the Hawaiians are not capable of self govern
Uent. What the Star Bulletin did do in this
aforementioned case was to point out the loop
roles in county law which exposed officials to
temptation, to demand that the law be amend
cd, and that honest officials be protected from
the acts of dishonest officials.
The Hilo Tribune is similarly far from the
facts when it charges that the Honolulu news
papers are afraid to .play up the acts of local
officials for fear Of bringing defeat to the Re
publican party. Even a casual reading Of local
newspaper files for six months past would show
the criticism that has followed the exhibition of
certain weaknesses and failures on the part of
the present board of supervisors. And 10th
papers recognize and have again and again
pointed out that the balance of power on Oahu
IS now held by the independent vote. 1t was so
in 1914 and il was so in 1912. And it will be so
in 1916
The Tribune also remarks with apparent
peevishness that the Hawaii county probe and
exposure of graft was ''the result of the de-
mands of the Honolulu press" 1t was the re-
suit of a:territory wide demand, in which the
newspapers of Hilo, particularly the Tribune,
took an active part 1t was primarily the de-
1hand Of good citizens Of Hawaii county that