Hawaii Holomua, Volume II, Number 15, 18 January 1894 — Stevens' Plea for Plunder. [ARTICLE]

Stevens' Plea for Plunder.

— Having worked himself into that sort of pseudo-patriotic frenzy much effected by the Fourth-of-July orator, Mr. John L. Stevens, Harrison's agent in this disreputable Hawaiian business, j put forth the following questions in the current North American Review. Will the American nation stand by its century’s record of republican government and of free Christian civilization, or will it repudiate its past by using its power to murder its own offspring and to stamp out the reforming work of pure and noble men and women, who have made the Hawaiian Islands what they are, thus following the once infamous example of the Austrian Hapsburgs in stifling the noble aspirations of Italy and Hungary? To the first question, the answer is yes, as the people of this country will never be guilty of extinguishing the sovereignty of a friendly potentate and annexating her dominion without either the consent of herself or of her people. To the second question, the answer is no, as the Hawaiian Islands are not American offspring and also for the further reason that annexation would be following “the infamous example” that Stevens condemns. The justification for these answers is to be found in his own statements. When he tries to show that United States marines were landed at Honolulu, not to overthrow the legitimate government or to keep it overtbrown, i but simply "as a precautionary step for the protection of American life and property and as a safeguard against night incendiarisin, stimulated by the hope of plunder feared by many of the best citizens," he refutes himself in the following effective way: The men of the Boston came ashore nearly fifty hours after the fall of the Queen, in whose defense no effective aid was offered by those who, had surrounded her in her carnival of immorality and official corruption.” If no effective aid was offered during an interval of more than two days to restore the Queen, what danger was there pending that required the presence of United States marines? “The night incendiarism" that Stevens speaks of was purely imaginary; it was not thought of probably until after he found himself under the necessity of finding some excuse for his outrageous conduct. That the so called Provisional Government is an American affair pure and simply, we have Stevens' own testimony. Notice also the curious argument with which it is accompanied. It is strictly correct and just to call those who now support the provisional government in Hawaii an American colony * * In the faith that some day they would come under the flag of their fathers, the sons and grand sons of American missionaries— teachers, physicians and merchants, now supporting the cause of annexation, have been reared. A more patriotic body of Americans do not exist. Shall we break that faith with them now? Shall we place them at the mercy of stupendous corruption available to our national rivals. To do so would be to press the brand of shame on the noble and and expansive brow of the American Republic. Who believes that the American missionaries, godly people undoubtedly, and conscious of their duty of rendering unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, reared their children in any such faith? What administration outside of Harrison’s ever gave them to understand that their adopted home should some time come under the control of the United States? Certainly no Democratic administration. Mr. Marcy, whom Stevens names in his own behalf, expressly disclaims the right of the United States to suppress the independence of the Hawaiian Island. The same view is implied in the following statement of Mr. Frelinghuysen, President Arthur’s secretary of state. A fixed policy dating back to

the origin of our constitutional government, was considered to make it inexpedient to attempt territorial aggrandisement which would require maintenance by a naval force in excess of any yet provided for our national uses. Even as simple coaling stations; such editorial acquisitions would involve responsibility beyond their utility. The United States have never deemed it needful to their national life to maintain impregnable fortresses along the world’s highways of commerce. To refuse the to annex the Hawaiian Islands is to break faith with nobody. It is simply to refrain from pressing Stevens' brand of hame on the noble and expansive brow of the American Republic.—Rochester Advertiser.