Jere Krischel at 09:50, 11 February 2006

2006-02-11T09:50:24Z

Ken Conklin at 03:08, 7 February 2006

2006-02-07T03:08:46Z

Jere Krischel at 05:20, 12 December 2005

2005-12-12T05:20:35Z

New page

1160 HAWAIIAN ISLANDS.
authorities and her statesmen declare the strategic position of the
islands to be such that no other country should appropriate them, but
American influence must be maintained paramount or they must take
possession. Such remarks have been made to me personally by Gen.
Schoiield and different admirals. Gen. Schofield reiterates the same,
with the reasons therefor, in a letter of December 30,1875,- addressed
to the Hon. J. K. Luttrell, M. 0. Admiral Porter sustains these views
in a letter to the Hon. Mr. Wood. The London Times says: "Themaritime
power that holds Pearl River Harbor and moors her fleet there
holds the key of the North Pacific." Sir George Simpson says that
" this archipelago is far more valuable on this account, that it neither is
nor ever can be shared by a rival." Alexander Simpson says: "From
the period of my first visit to the Sandwich Islands I became convinced
of their value and importance and therefore desirous that they should
form a British possession." Mr. Simpson says later: "I cannot but
regret now seeing the undecided action of the British Government that
some act on the part of Lord Geo. Paulet had not left any other conclusion
open than that the dynasty of Kamehameha must cease to
reign."
I have deemed the aggressions made by both British and French in
former times to enforce demands having in my opinion but little foundation
injustice, as part of a system of encroachment, having for its
ultimate object the appropriation or possession of these islands.
Indeed it has been stated to me that the French consul said that
had they, the French, supposed that the Government could have raised
the $20,000 demanded, O.apt. Laplace would have placed the sum so
high that it could not have been raised, and he would have taken possession
as at Tahiti. Shortly before the arrival of the Ambuscade in
August, 1842, the French consul told a friend of mine that he had no
complaints to make; everything was harmonious with the Government,
but shortly the Ambuscade arrived, and the captain presented such a
catalogue of inadmissible demands that it must have resulted in a
cession had not Mr. Richards and Haalelio just sailed for the United
States, England, and France to try to secure the acknowledgment
.of Hawaiian independence, and adjust any difficulties, if any were
found to exist. Under these circumstances Capt. Malet consented to
await the result of the mission.
Upon hearing of this, Admiral Richard Thomas, in command of the
British Pacific squadron, lying at Valparaiso or Callao, dispatched
Lord Geo. Paulet, with the frigate Garysfvrt, to Honolulu, to secure the
settlement of any difficulties between the island Government and the
British subjects. The Carysfort arrived on the 4th of February, 1843.
On the 14th Lord Paulet presented demands to which the King yielded
under protest. On the 20th the King visited the frigate and was
received with royal honors, but the next day new demands were presented,
amounting to $117,330.89. To satisfy these was beyond the
King's power, and after some preliminary negotiations a temporary
cessation was made on the 25th, and the administration was committed
to two commissioners appointed by Lord Paulet and one by the King.
The French and English were no doubt determined to take and hold
possession. They were playing against each other, and the islands
were the stake.
Lieut. Frere, the head of the governing commission, told me that they
saw the French were determined to have the islands, as they had taken
possession of the Society and Marquesas, and they were determined to
be beforehand with them. Britons sympathized with the feelings of Mr.
HAWAIIAN ISLANDS. 1161
Sympson, already quoted, and they expected the session would be permanent.
This, I think, was the general expectation of others as well,
and, as I believe, it would have been so had not Lord Paulet sent his
dispatches directly to the home Government, instead of through the
admiral, as the proper channel. When the admiral heard of the session
he immediately sailed for Honolulu, where he arrived July 26, and,
after some preliminary negotiations, on the 31st a force of British
marines with 2 brass field pieces marched to the plain east of the
town, with the admiral and King present, when the British flag was
lowered and the Hawaiian hoisted and saluted by the marines. The
admiral was offended with Lord Paulet, as I plainly perceived by
remarks made to myself when spending an evening at my house; and
my belief that the flag would not have been restored but for this informality
rests partly on the past practice of the British, and the statement
made to me by Mr. Richards that the Earl of Aberdeen, the
foreign secretary, or Mr. Addington, the under secretary, told him that
if Admiral Thomas had not restored the flag the British Government
would not have done so, and until they heard this Mr. Richards could
not negotiate.
The London Times of August 20 of the same year, in a semi-official
article, says:
It obviously becomes the duty of our Government to secure, by the most positive
formal pledges, both from France and America, that independence which we now
propose to restore to the native princes.
On the 28th of November, 1843, France and Great Britain jointly
engaged reciprocally to consider the Sandwich Islands as an independent
State, and never to take possession, neither directly or under the
title of protectorate, nor under any other form, of any part of the territory
of which they are composed.
In 1840 the French treaty was revised and the $25,000, taken away
in 1839, returned in 1849. The French consul, Dillon, with Admiral
Tromliue, presented a new list of grievances and demands, which the
Government could not concede, in consequence of which the admiral
landed his force and took possession of the custom-house, treasury, and
fort, and held possession three days. After spiking the guns and committing
some depredations the force was again embarked and sailed
away, taking with them the King's yacht and the consul and family. It
was said that they ordered the governor to pull down the Hawaiian
flag, which he refused to do, and that they did not do it themselves out
of respect to the treaty of November 28, 1843. In 1851 Mr. Perriu,a
new French commissioner, arrived, with similar complaints and making
similar demands. After long negotiations neither party would yield
enough to enable them to come to an understanding, and matters
assumed so serious and threatening an aspect that the consul sent to
the British commissioner to inquire if in case of necessity he would
hoist the British flag and protect the islands. He felt himself precluded
from doing so by the obligation of the joint treaty. The United States
commissioner was then applied to and consented to do so. I was
informed that the French commissioner learned this through the British
commissioner, and though the demands were not withdrawn he
ceased to press them. The United States were not a party to the treaty,
but were the first to recognize the independence of the islands in a
Presidential message to Congress December 31,1842.
The demands made were in the main untenable and the claims not
well founded, and even when well founded were untenable, because the
claimants had refused first to have the local authorities act upon them.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{p|1160}}
 authorities and her statesmen declare the strategic
 position of the islands
@@ Line 98: / Line 97: @@
 possession. They were playing against each other, and
 the islands were the
-stake. Lieut. Frere, the head of the governing
+stake.
 commission, told me that they
 saw the French were determined to have the islands, as
@@ Line 104: / Line 105: @@
 possession of the Society and Marquesas, and they were
 determined to be
-beforehand with them.   Britons sympathized with the
+beforehand with them. Britons sympathized with the
 feelings of Mr.
 {{p|1161}}
 Sympson, already quoted, and they expected the session
 would be permanent.
@@ Line 164: / Line 164: @@
 which they are composed.
-In 1840 the French treaty was revised and the
+In 1846 the French treaty was revised and the
 $25,000, taken away in
 , returned in 1849.  The French consul, Dillon,

Template:1160-1161 - Revision history

Jere Krischel at 09:50, 11 February 2006

Ken Conklin at 03:08, 7 February 2006

Jere Krischel at 05:20, 12 December 2005