Jere Krischel at 07:44, 7 February 2006

2006-02-07T07:44:06Z

Ken Conklin at 21:17, 31 January 2006

2006-01-31T21:17:25Z

Jere Krischel at 05:14, 12 December 2005

2005-12-12T05:14:24Z

New page

1 ( ) 7 6 HAWAIIAN ISLANDS.
Suppose you, as commanding officer, had received from the Secretary
of the Navy au order that you should obey the instructions and directions
of a man by the name of James H. Blount, then temporarily a
resident in the Islands of Hawaii and a commissioner on the part of
the United States, would you then feel obliged to obey his instructions f
Mr. BELKNAP. What is a commissioner?
Senator FRYE. He is nothing, in my opinion. Call him a minister
plenipotentiary.
Senator BUTLER. Suppose, when you called upon Mr. Blount for a
copy of his instructions he should give an authority from the President
of tlie United States, who is Commander in Chief of the Army and
Navy of the United States, would you then feel obliged to obey the
order?
Mr. BELKNAP. Yes.
Senator FRYE. Suppose the authority from the President of the
United States was an appointment as special commissioner for the
purpose of making an investigation in the Hawaiian Islands, and the
President of tlie United States should direct you by an order to obey
the orders of this commissioner, would you feel obliged to do it?
Admiral BELKNAP. Yes, if it implies that Mr. Blount was to exercise
paramount authority in naval matters; but the authority conferred
upon him is qualified by the words "acting in cooperation with the
commander of tlie naval forces," which I submit implies consultation
•and joint action of the parties concerned. If he should order me to
make war upon the Government of those islands I should feel that I
could not do it, for under the regulations I would have been held solely
responsible for the act of war.
Senator FRYE. Even with these instructions from the President of
the United States, under the regulations of the Navy Department
does not the responsibility still remain with the commanding officer?
Mr. BELKNAP. It does still remain.
Senator FRYE. IS there any way of relieving the officer of that
responsibility? If the President of the United States or the Secretary
of the Navy were to send an order direct to you to land troops or refrain
from landing troops that would relieve you from responsibility?
Mr. BELKNAP. That would relieve me.
Senator FRYE. But sending an order to you to obey the instructions
of somebody else can not change the responsibility from you to somebody
else?
Mr. BELKNAP. No, not under the terms of the regulations.
Senator BUTLER. That proceeds upon the theory that no naval officer
is bound to obey an illegal order, and he is the sole judge as to
whether it is illegal?
Mr. BELKNAP. Yes, in so far as law and regulation covers the particular
case.
Senator FRYE. This is addressed to Rear-Admiral Skerrett.
" HONOLULU, March 31, 1893.
" S I R : YOU are directed to haul down the United States ensign from
the Government building, and to embark the troops now on the shore
to the ship to which they belong. This will be executed at 11 o'clock
on the 1st day of April.
"I am, sir, your obedient servant,
"JAMES H. BLOUNT,
"Special Commissioner of the United States.1"
HAWAIIAN ISLANDS. 1077
Do you regard that as a legal order?
Mr. BELKNAP. I have been in the naval service nearly forty-seven
yoar.s, and that is the most peremptory order I ever saw issued by anybody.
If Mr. Blount wanted that done he might have requested the
admiral to do it, after consultation with him. Such would have been
the courteous and cooperative course.
Senator FRYE. DO you think Mr. Blount had any right to give any
such order?
Mr. BELKNAP. I do not think he had, at least in such peremptory
terms. There was no cooperation there.
Senator FRYE. And if tlie obeying of that order involved the taking
of human life would you, as the commander of a ship, have obeyed it?
Mr. BELKNAP. No; because I would have been held responsible if
anything happened. Such order would not have relieved me from the
responsibility imposed upon me by the regulations.
Senator FRYE. Notwithstanding the directions of the Secretary of
the Navy, notwithstanding the instructions of the Secretary of State
to Mr. Blount, notwithstanding Mr. Blount's direct order, under the
Naval Regulations you would not be relieved from responsibility as a
naval officer in command?
Mr. BELKNAP. I would not have been relieved, but I would have
withdrawn that force if the minister wished it.
Senator FRYE. I understand that. If there were no great responsibility,
overwhelming responsibility, you would comply with the wishes
of tlie minister just the same?
Mr. BELKNAP. Yes.
Senator FRYE. NOW
"U. S. LEQATION, HONOLULU, HAWAIIAN ISLANDS,
" January 16, 1893.
" S I R : In view of the existing critical circumstances in Honolulu,
indicating an inadequate legal- force, I request you to land marines
and sailors from the ship under your command for the protection of
the U. S. legation and the U. S. consulate, and to secure the safety of
American life and property.
"Yours, truly,
"JOHN L. STEVENS,
" Envoy Extraordinary, etc., of the United States.
"To Capt. C. C. WILTSE."
Do you regard that as a perfectly legitimate request, and properly
made?
Mr. BELKNAP. That is perfectly legitimate; a request I have had
made to me a half dozen times during my service.
Senator FRYE. That request does not compel you to land troops?
Mr. BELKNAP. It does not; it is a proper, legitimate, aud courteous
request from one official to another.
Senator FRYE. YOU would learn, as a naval officer, all you could with
regard to the existing conditions, and if, in your judgment, the safety
of the legation aud the consulate and the security of life and property
were of such a character as to require the landing of troops, you would
land them?
Mr. BELKNAP. Yes. It is the business of an officer to inform himself
thoroughly before taking such grave action.
Senator FRYE. But notwithstanding the fact that you had received
that request, if you had determined from your own investigations,

Template:1076-1077 - Revision history

Jere Krischel at 07:44, 7 February 2006

Ken Conklin at 21:17, 31 January 2006

Jere Krischel at 05:14, 12 December 2005