Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1917-06-02
"Readina The Minutes Of The Last
Meeting"

anod IN DIGGING up the Star Bulletins editorials
In the CITY campaign two and hal1 years ago a"
,roof that this paper should be supporting the Ne
s+rao6t ticket, thick thin, for the cleo
ton next Tuesday n+ ono
. Go to it. brethren. If arguments vi 'h"' SUI o.
rolled IN TO convince the voter of today you are WEI
come to the exercise. But it is the belief OF 'h's
narer that ii won't getyou anything.
In tho last campaign the Star Bulletin supported
49, .t-o;gbt Rer,ublcan ticket for supervisor and
,,road the defeat of the entire Democratic board
Why? ~ =
T,acause in that campaign the Democrats as a
marty were fighting the frontagetax law and be-
cause ma party and as city administration their
actiyities were centered around and moulded upon
this opposition to the frontage-tax
The Star Bulletin did not oppose Messrs Petrle
and Mcclellan in that campaign on the ground that
individually they we're incompetent lnemclent or
donbledealing men, but on Che ground that they
were members of city administration which maze
a fight on the frontagetax its chief issue
It was necessary to kill this anti-frontssetax pro-
paganda and the only way to kill it was to oust tne
administration which fostered and encouraged It,
The Star Bulletin stood for the straight Repuor'
can supervisorial ticket because in that campaign
the entire Democratic party and its candidates were
either actively opposing the frontagetax or were
silent on the issue. =
This paper has nothing now to take back which 1t
said then It's appeal them as now, was for city OIL
cials who would give eficent service and the Demo
cratic party could not give efficient service pro-
gram of opposition to a law on the statute books.
On October g. 1914, the Star Bulletin said editor
tally:
'eThe only proper rebuke is the defeat of the en-
entire Democratic ticket of supervisors"
This is the attitude consistently maintained
throughout the campaign, and to save our present
critics the trouble of going over the back-les we
state here and now that there is question where
we stood in that campaign-just there is no ques
ton where we stand in this campaign-for efici-
ency for straight thinking for fair play, and for
election on the merits of the men and the measures
And abore al, for the right of each uoter, each
citizen to get far discussion of the campaign is
sues and the right to decide for himself on the men
for soho,p he ,eiH cast his ballot 3
And, on the day after election, with the Demo
Gratis badly beaten here is what this paper said in
leading editorial:
"on Oahu It Is definitely demonstrated that the peo
ple demand efficiency in office They demand results
from their officials The Democratic board of super
yisors itself above the aw-on the local improve
ment ISSUE for mstance-set itself above the will Of
81 the people and the people destroyed that board"
81 And, continuing in that same editorial the Star
Bulletin said:
4The Republican municipal administration that will
take office January has a wonderful opportunity
the opportunity for efficient for economical work,
for sincere efforts, for results II it does not make
y good, two years from now the voters of Oahu will
Il sweep the city hall clean and try new men,"
The result of the recent primary showed that the
VOTERS were not satisfied with the record of some
thu Republican supervisors And it also showed a
b;os vote for Petrie and Mcclellan. The only con
. aIs..;o, fro,y this vote is that Honolulu does not
hold apainst Petrie and Mcclellan the faults of the
last Democrat;c administration-an that Homo
min is ready for the future instead of living in the
past.
The wear 1917 is not the year 1914. The Demo
cra.ic narty has found that the people are for the
frontaeetax. And it has had the wisdom to support
the frontagetax.
The year 1917 is new business" Is Honolulu te