Hawaii's Story by Hawaii's Queen (21 page)

Therefore, this session of the legislature, instead of giving attention to measures required for the good of the country, devoted its energies to the making and unmaking of cabinets. I think there were four rapidly commissioned by me and voted out. But at this point I call attention to the statement which I made to Hon. James H. Blount, the commissioner charged with the work of investigating the circumstances of the overthrow of the constitutional government of the Hawaiian Islands. In that statement will be found the matter which properly supplements this chapter, and need not be again detailed in this memoir. It naturally, together with some review of events already related, forms the connecting link between the opening ceremonies of the legislature and the enforced abdication of my authority.

Selected by reason of his perfect impartiality and long acquaintance with foreign affairs, this gentleman was sent out by His Excellency Grover Cleveland, President of the United States, and arrived in Honolulu on the twenty-ninth day of March, 1893. In July Mr. Blount made his final report, to which I need only allude to say that, as is well known, after digesting a mass of testimony on both sides, he decided that I was the constitutional ruler of the Hawaiian Islands. It was at this time that I made to him the statement which will be found in the closing pages of this volume.
¹

Of the manner in which Hon. J. H. Blount conducted the investigation, I must speak in the terms of the highest praise. He first met the parties opposed to my government, and took down their statements, which were freely given, because they had imagined that he could be easily turned in their favor. So they gave him the truth, and some important facts in admission of their revolutionary intentions, dating from several years back. Mr. Blount afterwards took the statements of the government, or royalist side. These were simply
given, straightforward, and easily understood. Compare the two statements, and it is not difficult to explain the final report of Mr. Blount. All the evidence can be reviewed by any person who may wish to do so, and a judgment formed of the men who caused this revolution, as it has been bound in volumes, and can be seen at the Library of Congress in the Capitol at Washington.

1
See Appendix B.

T
HE
three "intolerable" measures with which my government stands charged by those who succeeded in enlisting the aid of so powerful an ally as the United States in this revolution are as follows : —

First,
— That I proposed to promulgate a new constitution. I have already shown that two-thirds of my people declared their dissatisfaction with the old one; as well they might, for it was a document originally designed for a republic, hastily altered when the conspirators found that they had not the courage to assassinate the king. It is alleged that my proposed constitution was to make such changes as to give to the sovereign more power, and to the cabinet or legislature less, and that only subjects, in distinction from temporary residents, could ex'ercise suffrage. In other words, that I was to restore some of the ancient rights of my people. I had listened to whatever had been advised, had examined whatever drafts of constitutions others had brought me, and promised but little.

But, supposing I had thought it wise to limit the exercise of suffrage to those who owed allegiance to no other country; is that different from the usage in all other civilized nations on earth? Is there another country where a man would be allowed to vote, to seek for office, to hold the most responsible of positions, without becoming naturalized, and reserving to himself the privilege of protection under the guns of a foreign man-of-war at any moment when he should quarrel with the government under which he lived? Yet this is exactly what the quasi Americans, who call themselves Hawaiians now and Americans when it suits them, claimed the right to do at Honolulu.

The right to grant a constitution to the nation has been, since the very first one was granted, a prerogative of the Hawaiian sovereigns. The constitution of 1840 was drawn at Lahaina by a council aided by missionary graduates, but promulgated by the king without any appeal to other authority. That of 1852 was drawn by Dr. Judd, John II., and Chief Justice Lee. It was submitted to the legislature, not to the people, and, as amended by the members, became the law of the land. In 1864 there was an attempt to hold a constitutional convention : but, as I have shown in this history, Prince Lot, or, as he then was, Kamehameha V., dissolved the convention, because dissatisfied with its inaction, and in a week's time declared the former constitution abrogated; and, without asking a vote from anybody, gave the land a new and ably drawn constitution, under which the country was prosperously ruled for twenty-three years, or until it was overthrown by aliens determined to coerce my brother. Then followed their own draft of 1887, which also was never ratified by any deliberative assembly.

Such, in brief, is the history of constitution making in Hawaii; and from this mere statement of the facts it will be seen that of all the rulers of the Hawaiian Islands for the last half-century, I was the only one who assented to a modification of the existing constitution on the expressed wishes, not only of my own advisers, but of two-thirds of the popular vote, and, I may say it without fear of contradiction, of the entire population of native or half-native birth. Yet, with the above historical record before them in a book written and printed by one of their own number, the missionary party have had the impudence to announce to the world that I was unworthy longer to rule, because on my sole will and wish I had proposed to overthrow "the constitution."

Second
, —I am charged by my opposers with signing a lottery bill. I have already shown, in the communication of the cabinet to my brother, and the ruling of the Supreme Court supporting their view, that, according to the "bayonet" constitution, made and enforced by the missionary party, the sovereign
shall
and
must
sign such measures as the cabinet presents for signature. This is, in another form, an absolute denial of the power of the veto. But even had I held veto power, it may be noted here that on many accounts the bill was popular· No one would have been more benefited than my accusers. The government of Hawaii was to take no part in the lottery, but was to receive a fixed and openly stated sum of money for its charter. Among the advantages guaranteed was that the projectors should build a railroad around the large island of Hawaii, thus employing the people and benefiting land-holders.

We were petitioned and besought to grant it by most of the mercantile class of the city, — shopkeepers, mechanics, manufacturers, — in fact, all the middle class of the people. Nor is the reason at all difficult to state by any one who knows our community. When the people of native and part native birth prosper, business is good and the community is prosperous. The prosperity brought by the reciprocity treaty and the sugar plantations had disappointed our expectations. The money went into the hands of the few, who safely invested in foreign interests and enterprises every dollar of it, save the amount of wages paid to foreign and Mongolian labor. But the advantages to be received from the charter of this, which in some American localities is called a "gift enterprise," would be immediately put in circulation among our own people, because spent on much-needed public works, and thus would bring some little prosperity to them parallel to that enjoyed by foreigners.

I am not defending lotteries. They are not native productions of my country, but introduced into our "heathen" land by so-called Christians, from a Christian nation, who have erected monuments, universities, and legislative halls by that method. I am simply explaining what this bill intended, because, by the reports sent to their correspondents in the United States, the missionary party represented me as a grand vender of lottery tickets, by which I was to become rich and powerful; whereas the scheme, be it good or bad, would not have been to my individual profit, but to that of my native people.

Third,
—I proposed to issue licenses for the importation and sale of opium. I did think it would be wise to adopt measures for restricting and controlling a trade which it is impossible to suppress. With a Chinese population of over twenty thousand persons, it is absolutely impossible to prevent smuggling, unlawful trade, bribery, corruption, and every abuse. There were more scandals connected with the opium traffic than I have the time to notice here. Some of the most prominent citizens have been connected with these affairs, and frauds have been unearthed even in the custom-house itself. The names of Mr. Parks, of Mr. W. F. Allen, and more recently of Mr. Henry Waterhouse, have been associated with some very questionable dealings in this drug; and it may be doubted whether the practice of hushing up such matters is favorable to good morals in any community. The Provisional Government seems to have had no scruples in the matter; for the sons of the missionaries exported a large quantity of confiscated opium, and sold it for fifty thousand dollars in British Columbia.

The British government has long since adopted license instead of prohibition, and the statute proposed among the final acts of my government was drawn from one in use in the British colonies; yet I have still to learn that there has been any proposition on the part of the pious people of London to dethrone Her Majesty Queen Victoria for issuing such licenses.

I have thus, for the first and only time, reviewed the position of my opponents in regard to the only public charges which they made against my administration of government; and the reader can judge if all or any of them are of a nature to justify revolt against authority, and the summoning of aid of a foreign vessel of war, as they outrageously stated at the time, — "to protect American life and property ! "

My appointments of cabinet officers were never given the test of experience; because the ministry was invariably voted out by the legislature "for want of confidence" without just cause, and in one notable instance within an hour or so from the time when I sent in the names. It is a matter of great satisfaction to me when I look back at the actions of that legislature, to reflect that none of the ministers of my selection have ever been voted out for any crime, for any defalcation in their accounts, or for failure in the exercise of their duties in public office. But it is a source of sincere regret to me that the members of that legislative assembly should have so forgotten themselves, the dignity of their position, and the responsibility with which the people had intrusted them as representatives, as to permit themselves to behave in such an unpatriotic manner.

The Macfarlane cabinet was one of the greatest popularity amongst the Hawaiian people on account of the stand Mr. Macfarlane took in the House, and his courage in replying to the false and uncalled-for speeches of J. L. Stevens, the American Minister resident.

A
FTER
the so-called Provisional Government had been recognized by Minister Stevens, and I had referred in writing my case to the United States, there was no more for me to do but retire in peace to my private residence, there to await the decision of the United States government. This I did, and cautioned the leaders of my people to avoid riot or resistance, and to await tranquilly, as I was doing, the result of my appeal to the power to whom alone I had yielded my authority. While in Washington in 1897, I had prepared for me as brief a statement as possible from official documents there of the reference of my case to the decision of the United States government as arbitrator in the matter.
¹

It has been my endeavor, in these recollections, to avoid speaking evil of any person, unless absolutely demanded by the exigencies of my case before the public. I simply state facts, and let others form their own judgment of the individuals. But of Minister John L. Stevens it must be said that he was either mentally incapable of recognizing what is to be expected of a I gentleman, to say nothing of a diplomatist, or he was decidedly in league with those persons who had conspired against the peace of Hawaii from the date of the "Queen's Jubilee" in 1887. Several times in my presence, to which he had access by virtue of his official position, he conducted himself with such a disregard of good manners as to excite the comment of my friends.

His official despatches to his own government, from the very first days of his landing, abound in statements to prove (according to his view) the great advantage of an overthrow of the monarchy, and a cession of my domains to the rule of the United States. His own daughter went as a messenger to the largest one of the islands of my kingdom to secure names for a petition for the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands to the American Union, and by an accident lost her life, with the roll containing the few names she had secured. All this took place while he was presumed to be a friendly minister to a friendly power, and when my minister was under the same relation to his government. Of his remarks regarding myself personally I will take no notice, further than to say that, by his invitation, I attended a very delightful lunch party at his house a few months before the United States troops were landed.

Mr. Albert F. Willis arrived in Honolulu on Saturday, the fourth day of November, 1893. He came from San Francisco on the same steamer with Rev. Dr. C. M. Hyde, the local representative or agent of the American Board of Missions. By this gentleman Mr. Willis was approached and informed, until he became imbued with Dr. Hyde's own prejudices against the native people of the Hawaiian Islands and against their queen. That clergyman's propensity to speak evil of his neighbor may be recalled by those who read his remarks about the late lamented Father Damien. One of the first acts of Mr. Willis was to send for me to come to his residence, which I did, accompanied by my chamberlain, Mr. Robertson. Was it the place of the lady to go to the house of the gentleman, or for the latter to call on the lady? I leave it for others to decide. As for myself, I simply felt that I would undertake anything for the benefit of my people.

At this time men were going about town with firearms; shots were at times flying about the city, whistling through the air, or penetrating houses to the great danger of the occupants; and no one was responsible for the local disorder. Words of harm towards my person had been openly spoken by the revolutionists; spies were in my household, and surrounded my house by day and by night; spies were also stationed at the steps of the Congregational church opposite my residence, to take note of those who entered my gates, how long they remained, and when they went out. My respect for true religion prevents my stating the active part one of the preachers of God's Word took in this espionage. It was under these circumstances that I prepared to visit Mr. Willis in accordance with his request.

On entering the house of Mr. Willis, Mr. Mills directed me into the parlor, while he and Mr. Robertson entered the opposite room. A Japanese screen divided the apartments. I was seated on the sofa when Mr. Willis, entering, took a chair, and sat down just in front of me, near the screen. He informed me that he was the bearer of the kindest greetings from President Cleve-land, and that the President would do all in his power to undo the wrong which had been done. He then asked if I would consent to sign a proclamation of general amnesty, stating that I would grant complete protection and pardon to those who had overthrown my government. I told him that I would consult my ministers on the matter. The suggestion did not seem to meet with his approval.

I well knew, and it has been conclusively shown in this history, that my actions could not be binding or in any way recognized unless supported by the ministers in cabinet meeting. This was according to law, and according to the constitution these very persons had forced upon the nation. Perhaps Mr. Willis thought that all he had to do was to propose, and then that my place was to acquiesce. But he asked again for my judgment of the matter as it stood, and seemed determined to obtain an expression of opinion from me. I told him that, as to granting amnesty, it was beyond my powers as a constitutional sovereign. That it was a matter for the privy council and for the cabinet. That our laws read that those who are guilty of treason should suffer the penalty of death.

He then wished to know if I would carry out that law. I said that I would be more inclined personally to punish them by banishment, and confiscation of their property to the government. He inquired again' if such was my decision. I regarded the interview as an informal conversation between two persons as to the best thing for the future of my country, but I repeated to him my wish to consult my ministers before deciding on any definite action. This terminated the consultation, excepting that Mr. Willis specially requested me not to mention anything concerning the matter to any person whomsoever, and assured me he would write home to the government he represented.

He did so. It was a long month before he could receive any reply; but when it came he communicated the fact to me, and asked for another interview at his house. This time he also inquired if there was any other person I would like to have with me. I suggested the name of Mr. J. O. Carter, at which the American minister seemed to be highly pleased. So at the stated hour we all met. This time Mr. Willis had present as his stenographer Mr. Ellis C. Mills, afterwards American consul-general at Honolulu. He first read to me what he said were some notes of our former interview. From whence did these come? By Mr. Willis's own proposition we were to be entirely alone during that interview, and to all appearance we were so. Was there a stenographer behind that Japanese screen? Whatever the paper was, Mr. Willis finished the reading of it, and asked me if it was correct. I replied, " Yes."

Doubtless, had I held the document in my hand, and had I been permitted to read and examine it, for the eye perceives words that fall unheeded on the ear, I should then have noticed that there was a clause which declared that I was to have my opponents beheaded. That is a form of punishment which has never been used in the Hawaiian Islands, either before or since the coming of foreigners. Mr. Willis then asked me if my views were the same as when we met the first time; and I again said "Yes," or words to that effect. Mr. Carter inquired if I rescinded so much of Mr. Willis's report as related to the execution of the death penalty upon those in revolt. To this I replied, "I do in that respect."

Yet, notwithstanding the fact was officially reported in the despatches of Mr. Willis, that I especially declared that my enemies should not suffer the death penalty, I found to my horror, when the newspapers came to Honolulu from the United States, that the President and the American people had been told that I was about to behead them all ! There is an old proverb which says that " a lie can travel around the world while the truth is putting on its boots." That offensive charge was repeated to my hurt as often as possible; although I immediately sent my protest that I had not used the words attributed to me by Mr. Willis in our informal conversation, and that at my first official interview with him I had modified (so far as my influence would go) the law of all countries regarding treason.

At the interview held Saturday, Dec. 16, I did decline to promise executive clemency, and gave as my reason that, this being the second offence of these individuals, they were regarded as dangerous to the community. That their very residence would be a constant menace; that there never would be peace in my country, or harmony amongst the people of different nations residing with us, as long as such a disturbing element remained, especially after they had once been successful in seizing the reins of government. But on Monday, Dec. 18, Mr. Willis came to Washington Place; and again acting under the advice of Hon. J. O. Carter, I gave to him a document recognizing the high sense of justice which had prompted the action of Mr. Cleveland, and agreeing that, in view of his wishes, the individuals setting up or supporting the Provisional Government should have full amnesty in their persons and their property, if they would work together with me in trying to restore peace and prosperity to our beautiful and once happy islands.

It was most unfortunate that the American minister should have so misrepresented me, or that I should have so misunderstood him, or that his stenographer (if there was one concealed at that interview) should have blundered, or that I should have been so overburdened by the many aspects of the painful situation as to be ignorant or unconscious of the importance of the precise words read in my presence. The only
official
communication made by me was to the effect that there should be perfect amnesty, and this was made in recognition of President Cleveland's courtesy and justice.

Events proved that it would not have made the least difference what I had said or what I had not said; for these people, having once gained the power, were determined never to relinquish it. Mr. Dole wrote to the American minister charging him with being in correspondence with me, and demanded of Mr. Willis if he was acting in any way hostile to his, that is, the Provisional Government. The very next day Mr. Willis sent word to Mr. Dole that he had a communication to make to him. So, Dec. 20, Mr. Willis went to President Dole, and delivered his message from President Cleveland, in which Mr. Dole was asked to resign that power which he had only obtained through the acts of Minister Stevens and the United States troops. Mr. Willis's speech is a full and explicit confession of the ground taken by my government, that it was overthrown by a conspiracy to which the United States, through its minister, was a party; and after assuring Mr. Dole that I had granted full amnesty to all parties, asked him to resign and restore the old order of things. Mr. Willis says in his latest utterance on the subject : —

"It becomes my duty to advise you of the President's determination of the question which your action and that of the queen devolved upon him, and that you are expected to relinquish to her her constitutional authority. In the name of and by the authority of the United States of America, I submit to you the question,
 '
 Are you willing to abide by the decision of the President? '"

Could there be any plainer recognition than this that I was the constitutional ruler of my people?

And yet I cannot help calling attention to the difference in the treatment accorded to the two parties, and their reference to the United States. Three days were given to Mr. Dole to consider Mr. Cleveland's decision, as announced to him by Mr. Willis. The documents were placed in his hands to study over; and were he so disposed he could call together his associates, compare their opinions, and then return a carefully written and diplomatic answer. This he did, under date of the 23d of December, at midnight, when he himself delivered his response to Mr. Willis. In contrast, I, a lone woman, was sent an order to go to the residence of a gentleman until that moment a stranger to me. Without the least warning of the nature of the communication to be made to me, and without a moment's deliberation or consultation with friendly counsellors, I was urged to give my opinion as to matters which in any government should be decided only after careful consideration; and then my first immature impressions of the claims of my people and of justice were telegraphed broadcast, while my official and subsequent proclamation of entire amnesty was hardly noticed.
And yet, all this time, by Mr; Willis's own words, I was recognized by the United States as the constitutional sovereign of the Hawaiian Islands.

The Hawaiian people almost worship the name of President Cleveland; for he has tried to do what was right, and it was only because he was not supported by Congress that his efforts were not successful. Mr. Dole's answer, as could have been predicted by any who know the men composing the missionary party, was a refusal to comply with the request of President Cleveland. But, none the less, my grateful people will always remember that, in his message to Congress and in his official acts, Mr. Cleveland showed the greatest anxiety to do that which was just, and that which was for the honor of the nation over which he had been elected chief ruler.· He has always had from me the utmost respect and esteem.

¹
A copy will be found in Appendix C.