Hawaii Holomua, Volume I, Number 28, 19 October 1893 — Aganinst Annexation [ARTICLE]

Aganinst Annexation

Another Amenean Boy SPEAK8 American Sentimcnts. The Second Address BT THE Lelami Stttnford l'niversity Studcnts, in The l)ebnte wiih Sfudenfs from the Cnlifornia University. The Anti-Anneiationists Win Every Time. A. H. EATerHISZl, the Speaker. Publishfil exclnsively by the HoLoKUa f«>r the special bonefit Ol tlie “ Star.” Mu. Chaiu.van: The amu-K itionīsts have spent inany ptvcioiis m<uuents iu proving to you that these Hawuiian lslamls are in tho luiihllo of the soa. The\ hnvo proven, th«t the Paeiiie is a broad oeean and bave producetl a map to prove it. Thev have drawn lines from the islamls to almost every jx>int of prouiinence in tho Pacific, this proving to you wbat \u» never donbtcd that tln*se islamls are in the middle of the sea; and that by their thus poaiiioo they form a key to the E»rth. These proven propositi»*ns tt>gether with their portrayal of our great future coaimerco aml Hawaii'a intimate connect>on with it are their premises aud aunexatton is tbeir conclusii>u. Wo will do tbem justiee to say that banng a few grave inconsistencies justice haa been done evervthing bnt the conclusion In Csptain A. T. Mahon’s artielo in tho March Fornm be bases Amenea’» r ght to annex aometbmg upon an ingenious analogy. He compares onr uaiion in its growth to that of an individual. “In our infancv,” he savs“we * « borvlered on ihe Atlantic—in our youth »e advan«.'e»l to the muKilo west and m our matur:ty, we bon!erml fn m se.» to sea." *Ts tbat any reason.” he proceeds to urge. **wby we sbould not eontinue to accumulate and exUnd our b» nnd'»ries furtber wei-L Let tn*‘ c»rrv the att<logy one step further and remark. tbat wheu a man h«s arrtved at mature growth. any furtber aeeumolaii»»n ts an icrav a ting banlen—and it is »o just in pn»j»ortion as the dist»r«ce ot this aeeomnlatiou i&crease$ beyond tbe naturai iiui:t Bon<ls have been fixed f»»r our nalionai habitation. Hawaii is two thons<od milea

!bevond our bon!ers in the middle ,of the sea; Sacb an addition I is a most unnataral, aononnal. and ueedles burden. So mueh for au inconsistenvy. What aould we expect to bave nrped as a reason why the Uuited I States »bonld |»ersae any policy of annexatioa. When we extende<l domicion over tbe north west terrītory »nd alded the j <lora »ins of Loaisiarsa Texas t aml tbe Pae. West, there was ( reason for snch a policy in the ininnaie value of the acquisition thems»<lves: They otfered v;»st resoaroes for individoal and I nalioual wealth; ample scoj»e \ for sctileroent and naiional growth; l»esitloe the possibility of esttblisbing milliona of bappy homea. No such motions ean for a momenl be nrged in tbe pr<*seut c.tse. Hawaiian territory is already peopled and her develoj»ed. Neither have the affirmative attempted to show iiny peculiar merit on the part of the great mess of foreign laborers, that would make them »lesirable American citi/eus. know h\' sad experionce what the East (,)rient aml the Islands of tue Pacific eau produce. e know bv sadder experience what the second right of Ameriean citizenship moans. According to certain arlicles iu the proposed annexation treatv. the over zealous eom- • raissioners wouhl restrict the rigbts of citizeusbip to a favored few. the rest would be deprive»l even the rights of imraigration to our states. Such h position ignores tl»e fandamental principles of our coustitution. Absolute liberty and equality are inalienuhle rights, whieh onee granted by a cbarter of annexation are not to be iguored. Tc< annex Hawaii moans tbat hei* wliole mongrol and mongolian pnpulaiion be iucorporatedbodily into the body of onr American tvpublic, but to deuy to tho least of these uew made citizeus the right of migrution to eveiy parts of our domain is to make tho “liberty” or our coustitutiou. a libel and a most treacberons frand. Fellow-citizens, guard jealoosly your birth-right and beware to whom you stretch your ims. There are jnst two reasons why tbe Affirmative urge *nnexation. FirsL Because tbere is a |arge uumber of Amerioans in tbe isiands and vast property interest at stake. The aecond reason is due to ihe sdrantago of position. Concerning the 1,800 Americans and their property I w<»uld ask—why is oni naiion auv more responstble for tbem than for citizens who bare gone to Japan—China or any qoarters of the earth domain. These Americans have tnrned tbeir backs npon tbeir naiional land, developed resources in tho territory of another nation: and b*ve accumul»ted we«!tb and political power. Just now the halaooe of tbat power seems io be tbeirs. Tbe natives hare watcbed with jealousy aod witb pain ihe decrease of their control whieh office by office b«s been filcbed away. Now io this last crisis. when the natives are awake to tntrigjaes and injostice done aod danger seems impending tbese explorers, theee forvign l«nd grabbers and office nunpm have tarned back tb«ir looging eyes and imploie onr nohle oni >o to become a party to tbeir nsnrpatioo.

We hare ha i oar wars. oar rebe!iions acd oar revoIutioas. Pray heaveu they’er don«’ Now onr nation is orged to extricate her unwillinu citizens inim tlieir self itnpose<l pmlicanient, »ud by so doing to plunge into a policy of foreiga acquīsition with its ineritabie menaee to peaee tiud invitation to trar; l>esides tbe opening of our na tiou's arms to an nnweleome h»>st. Tht*se pleading prodi gals have left our laml, — tbev have cast lot wiih another peopie, aiui altbo tfaey will alwae», faave onr kimllv eye bccause we are intcr\*st<Hi in onr own blood, vet as a nation, for them we have no longer any eoneem. Tfae second and only real ami vital argnmeut urg*nl in faror of anuexatiou is »lue to tfae advau tago of position. Tfais advantage tbe affirmative woala bave our nation eoutrol botfa for navai and for commercial purposes. Let me ask, why for naval pnrposes Our uation is not a naval power, doesn’t pretend to be and lias no ambition to be. The annexationists would have us be!iove that a fort iu thase islands is essential, in case of war, to the protection of onr coast. Protection to onr coastI! Hawaii is ‘2000 miles, teu days travel boyond our borders ont in tbe midd!e of tfae sea. Protection to our coast!! Better build an arsenal in tho moon; for while Hawaii has absolutely none, snch a position woukl have one single advantage: lt might occasionally overlook our affairs. Concerning their proposition for naval coutrol of the Pacific ’tis us wild as tbe waves. Ever sinqo tfae ēstnblishment of our independeaee. the policy rf onr uation bas been to ameliorate the tendency of n a t i o n a ! strife. Now in the most peaceful and prosperous tiine of our existence we are urged to a policy of foreign conqiu“*t tho maintaiuance of whieh inean* the euormons increHse of our naval power; and why? 8imply to prove that we ean maintain a successfnl competition against our powerfnl rivals on the sea. A mere greed after unuvailing control. Judge CJooley, in a recent address to Ann Arbor law students, said that the demand for naval controls of these Islands is inspired by tbe old adage:-“In time of peaee prepare for war.“ Soch a policy, Jadge Cooley proceeded to show, is grinding the nations of Eorope into the dost to-day, and he wonld substitate the wiser policy;—“lo time of peaee prepare Hgainst war.” Ko nation ©ver foond its fall. becaose it pnrsned a conservative policy, (a pollcy at whieh the affirmative has seen fit to sneer with scom.) because it was wiiling to le«ve prosperity alone, and heeanae it ignored the temptation of a mere grasping after power. Bot annexation for eommer- | eial reasons i« tbe mainstar of < their poeiiion. W:thoat a doabt tbes« islands are io the line of j tnde tbat is aooa t o heeome enonnoaa. Bal remamber they are oolr in the line of trade, { and not the great eentre of trades tbea»elTes. The ralae of their poūiion therefore to the ; United Staies ia not their owu relative)y smal< eommeiw. «hieh 1 oor nation must inevitab!v eoa- ! trol at all eveats. bat becaose

Hawaii ean fumish as with a ! harb«>r for coaling and way station. Tbeadvantageo£sueha po»iitson : bas not been over-estimatcd. bat have not tbe affirmative beeu hastv in tboir conclcsion that we must annex m onler to secnre : such privilege. They woald have os fancy that in case theso Couimtsstoners for Ameneaa axmexatiou are disappoinled. they will I go otf in a fever, olier the islanvl» to another uatiou aml refu.se to -leal with u» any n:ore. Our u.ttiou is however. not so eass!y to Ih‘ ignored. Theso Hawaiiao Commissioners have apj'eale«i f»'r closer unionfirst to theU. s nut because of any noble patrioaic sentimeut. bot l>ecanse the indostries of these islands. ia whieh tbey are persoually interest- «i, are so closely relattsl to and dependent upon the attitude whieh the U. S. hohis towarl them. Before their eommerce wasutterly in »igmficant. lu tfaat year ttie shippers were granted exemption by the U. S. frem the 2 cents sug:»r import duty. and for tfais we were gn»nte»l the rigfat to in.-unlaiu and fortify Pearl Harbor. Frora that time tbeir sugar trade beeamo enormous, and great wealih waa accnraalated, ontil tlie “fiue sugar" of tho MoKmley Bill pat other sugar producing localities on an e»|nal footing with themselves. From that time there has been an unhappy reversion to former unprofitable conditious. all the tirae has passetl in whieh they eoukl have pr»>fited in other m«rkets if it was foasible. But it isa t feasiblo, so closely is this trade depeudent uj>on our market. Onr nation’s favor has simp)y raade their fortune aud the witbdrawal of it has rnade their industries fail. Aunexation or no annexation,H«waii must always look to us as a foster mother: tho ouly source of snpport aud encour»gcmeut for their limited commercial eapaeitv. T!ie Commissioners are «ware of tfais intimate depeiuleneo and we nee»l fear no p»»!icy of retaliation, because we refuse to annex. Tney will always be open for the best our nation bas to offer. It bas been proven that our nation, through its raercenary Minister Stevens. has established the Provisional Government; tbat withont such support the governmeot could never bave been eatablished nor a momeni maintained. By tbe veiy natnre of the support given. it is evidont that the sole pnrpoee of establishiog tbat govemment was for American annexation. Snppose now tbat our gov»rnmeut. as io wimlom we hope sbe may, rtfuse to annei, aod thas the snpoort given by Stevens be witbdrawn; the only porpose for whieh soch a government was established will have met with a defeat. The Hawaiiao Provisi onal Government will then h«ve j . solve»l its destiny ’ aml will Uke its plaee among powers that are j j dead wbere it proper!y belongs. (t bas a)so been proven tbat ; tbe masses in Hawaii aro opi posed to annexation and &re I ; waiting *oxioosly for a renewal j | of their independ» noe. Who ’ tben I «s*k, will r*Ser annexation | . to anotber nation.and for what ; I porpose? Tbe af&na«tive however will orge. altbongb, the is!ands may ■ not be offered. yel §ome deetgn- | ' iog power may take adrantage of 1

| the prt»s«nt uns«.*ft]e<.! eooililio» sdi! usurp doni5DK>B. r*ther than harttnl soch unfriom!Iy <x>ntrol, *■<> i>hoa!d by »11 meaai ; unt'i. 1 apprvciat« the force of »och an ar£iment, bnt th« l*nit«x! Statt > i< n t a natīo® whoso enmity snci; a »b*signinj{ 1 powor ean atfor»l to incur. A | cerUin Aoi. policy known aa | ihe "Moanw Doctrin um i tangbt Eng. an*,l other n.»tioni sorae valuab!e 1os.-m-.us. and | when oor gov*ma>eat waa imnieasor*blv v«iler !tan it h t® tlav. since that policy was fotmulI aknl by 5tsaathor. our naiion ha« ! mainUineii that the Eutera • an*i Westein Heniisi>heres were essentiaily am? politīcally *listinct. Our policy has refraintxi from tooehiog any European atfairs. aml tl«inaniis that the states of Enmpe ai»d of the East mainlain » like nentr*l bearing toward onr est. Engl«nd. France »n«l Spain tbree timea have attonpted to nn«iemiine the imiepemienoe of certain AmericHn uations; eaeh tiui« thev have ii«ietlv abandoned their purpose siroply. beoause tbe l*nite<i States sent f*>rth the edict th»t suoh interfereuoo wa» an act uufriemlly to our nation aud wouhl be considered ns a menaoe to onr peaee. I have shown that tho Hawaiian Islaod* are most intimately- relate<l to us and I mainlain that they ar« most emphatically to be embraced by the polioy of the Monroe Do<*trine. A«v |>ower, therefore. who attempts to nsurp Hawaiian indej>endenco will be imraediatelj oondemned as pursuing a jx>licj niost nnfriendly to onr naiion and thus committing an aot iu prt*paration f<»r war. ’lho wili of our republic, witb its worldwide commeroo is not with eontempt to be set a-ido and no nation *>n the face of the carih, for the control <>f Hawaii, is preparod f >r llie stej>. llie Att urgo that Cong. is most lialile ; to annex in case we refuse. On the contrarv that nation is leasl liable of them a!l In 1><43, France and Enelaml bound themaelves by treaty nerer to take dominion of these i»iands. I* 1887, that treaty w*s reindorsod. Just now the foreign posseiwio!isof Earope are fast looseniug frora ber grasp. and half the pow©rs of England are eagerly boping for her fall Is it then consisteni witb intelligence to propose that Englaod in her pre«ent involved foreign affairs, ean afford to incur the enmity of France for a broken treaty and of the U. S. for an unfriendly act. siniply for tbe control of islands whose ralne to her is bnt an added bnrden. The affirroative propose tbaft J«pan a!s» bas designs. I eao’i prophesy what nalion tbe next spe*ker will dedaro aa Ihe fnture po8sessor of these islands, 1 consider »ooh a propoeition as a bold gatae at blnffing whieh th« , affirmative have learntxl frora ■ theīr honor»ble predece*«<>TS Mr. ! Tbnrston and bis feiIo« C<>mnne- | sioners. Soffice it to say tbai Japao bas receive<l too mueh and has jet I oo maeh to aak from tb« friendakip of oor n«tion to thiok of severing that bond witb ieoponity. Hawaii most nsaintain ber government indepeDdeot of tbe «orl<L Tbe U. S. most ohkaia : by treaty »boee priri!ege« «« 1 have *l«kys enjoyed and avoid

tbose Dcdesirsbie rel*tīonH vbich * doses union vou!d inTolre. e aro acca«e»l of plarīng *‘dog in the mancer' beoans« we ncitber nnae\ nor allow othea nation» to do fco; and the blood of everv sncceeding Unwaūan revolution will b? iaūi to our charge. ‘Tls trne we ar« res|>«in&ible to th»s p*n>ple and to ali nations for a just and righteous inHnonee: Xo morc. Their own ineviuble destiny raust witb many pain» be wrooght by thom»elves. Wo are not pursaing a policy of dog in tbo manger. The-ie Americans havo east tbeir lot with a foreipn people; they have planted fur tbeoHelveg, and now the indigestable prodace of their duing they wouKi p»lm off npon us. Onr nations knows bowever what proper kind of Btutf we live on. and with ealm dignitv adraonislu-s her prodigal in paiieneo to maiaiain tlieir own mangers and to eut their • own liay. After all why shoald we anne\ ? what ooble .“t«tesraen have proposed the aeheme? Tis true our ex-President Harrison was made an agont of thesc misrepresentatives of the Hawaiian people, but not knowingly so. When we decided to parchase Louisiana it was becau.se the fur searching eye of Thomas Jetferson was behind the scene, when Alaska becan»e onrs. it was because vast wealih was foreseen bv oar greut secretarv of State William Seward. But who besides meu whose pors<>nal interests are involved have proposēd thoaniiexation of Hawaii. With all honor for the lmsinoss intcgrity of Mr. Thurston and his fellow Comrnissionors, I would say in cIosing: luconteraplatiugtheiuangaration of so grave a p<»licy, a ]>olicy of acijuisition whieh in it eonelasion raade Eome totter md fall, and whieh is the in *vitablo sonn*e of £ugland s \veakness to-dav; in considering snch a move 1 woald haveour nation advised by noble and patriotio statesmen, men with an eye single to the well being and the perj>etaation of our ualion. «nd I wonhl not havo our noble govcrnment touchcd by the advice and inspiration of men wbose purpose is openly moved by the paltry considerations of personal gain.