Template:378-379 - Revision history

Jere Krischel at 09:49, 18 December 2005

2005-12-18T09:49:04Z

Jere Krischel at 04:15, 9 December 2005

2005-12-09T04:15:12Z

New page

Liliuokalani did not seem to take this narrow view of the revolution
she had inaugurated.
The banishment or death of the white people and the confiscation
of their estates was the final decree recorded in the Queen's heart and
mind, as she freely stated to Minister Willis, and until this cruel work
had been accomplished she held that her policy of revolution would
be a failure. There is some ground for hope that these were not her
sincere purposes or wishes but that in giving expression to them she
was "playing a part." As opposed to such purposes, or to a Queen
who could imagine them in the presence of the constitutional protection
given to the rights and liberties of the people throughout this
hemisphere, Americans should not hesitate in the support of a government
de facto, set up to oppose her, because she had not made a formal
surrender of a place where a few soldiers and policemen had been
stationed, who were powerless to hold it against the people then under
arms. It was an act of mercy to her and her retainers that they were
not forced into the commission of acts of violence. An interregnum
existed in the executive Government of Hawaii, which was caused by
the effort of the Queen to destroy the constitution of 1887, and by the
act of the people in accepting her will for the completed coup d'etat,
and, in making that the occasion for supplying the executive department
of the Government with a chief.
A careful investigation has failed to show that any conspiracy now
exists that is directed to the virtual displacement of the Provisional Government.
The personal efforts of the Queen seem to have been directed
toward a provision for a safe and comfortable life, free from the anxieties
of office and "the stress of her native subjects." Her power of
attorney to Paul Newman and his mission to the United States indicate
a reliance on the "arts of peace" rather than of war for indemnity for
the past and security for the future. The opinions, or sentiments,
expressed by her in the three interviews she had with Mr. Willis, in
which she uttered the severest denunciations against the white race in
Hawaii, and declared her willingness, if not her purpose, to confiscate
their estates and to banish or to destroy them, while they are a seeming
expression of the lofty indignation of an offended ruler, are so unsuited
to the character of a queen crowned by a Christian and civilized people,
and so out of keeping with her character as a woman who had received
kindly recognition and personal regard from other good and refined
ladies, that they shock all right-minded people in Christendom. The
Government of the United States should willingly forbear to regard
these utterances as her official expression of such designs upon the
lives and liberties of those whom she would find in her power, upon her
restoration to the throne, and accept them as a means adopted by her
to convince Mr. Willis that her restoration to the throne was impossible,
and was not in accordance with her wishes.
The President, on the first intimation of these harsh declarations of
the Queen, at once laid them before Congress, and abandoned the
further exercise of his good offices to bring about a reconciliation between
her and those who were conducting and supporting the Provisional
Government.
Mr. Willis, however, regarding his instructions as continuing to
require his intercession beyond the point where the President considered
that it should cease,, held a second and third interview with Liliuokalani.
After these interviews had closed, the Queen being still
firm in her course, Mr. Carter, a trusted friend, obtained her signature
to a pledge of amnesty, and made that the basis of his proposition

to Mr. Dole for the abandonment of the Provisional Government, which
was summarily refused. This closed that incident. Mr. Willis, in
what he did, obeyed what he conceived to be his instructions, and being
so distant from Washington, it is a matter of regret, but not of surprise,
that there was an apparent want of harmony between his action in continuing
his interviews with Liliuokalani after the President had determined
that the full duty of the Government had been performed.
The attitude of Liliuokalani at the conclusion of this proceeding is
that of waiting for a pleasant retirement from the cares of public life,
rather than of waiting for an opportunity to bring about a hostile collision
with the people who support the new order of government in
Hawaii.
In dealing with a grave subject, now for the first time presented in
America, we must consider the conditions of public sentiment as to
monarchic government, and we shall derive also material help from the
light of English history. In the Western Hemisphere, except as to
the colonial relation, which has become one of mere political alliance
chiefly for commercial reasons, and does not imply in any notable
case absolute subjection to imperial or royal authority, royalty no
longer exists. When a crown falls, in any kingdom of the Western
Hemisphere, it is pulverized, and when a scepter departs, it departs
forever; and American opinion can not sustain any American ruler in
the attempt to restore them, no matter how virtuous and sincere the
reasons may be that seem to justify him. There have been heathen
temples in the older States in this hemisphere where the bloody orgies
of pagan worship and sacrifice have crimsoned history with shame; and
very recently such temples have been erected in the United States to
abuse Christianity by the use of its sacred name and ritual. When
the arms of invaders, or mobs of the people, have destroyed these
temples, no just indignation at the cruelties that may have been perpetrated
in their destruction could possibly justify their restoration.
It is a great blessing to this Western World that the nations are to be
spared the calamities which Blackstone describes as "imbruing the
kingdom of England in blood and confusion," growing out of claims ot
succession to the crown. In almost every reign prior to that of the
present house of Hanover, the lives and property of the people of
England, amid the greatest cruelties, have been sacrificed in settling
pretensions to the crown. It was these conflicts and this distress ot
innocent sufferers that caused the people to claim through the judges
the protection of the doctrine, that service rendered to the king who
held the scepter was lawful, althoughhe was not rightfully iu possession
of the crown. No greater liberty of the people was ever devised or
granted than the right of protection under a king de facto against aking
de jure.
I)e facto governments, when they seek to supply the gap created by
an interregnum, are favored in the international law, and when they
are also based on the right of popular government in conflict with regal
government, or to prevent its reestablishment, once it has disappeared
in a State of the Western Hemisphere, it is so rooted and established in
the foundations of the rightful authority to rule that it is justly to be
ranked among the cardinal liberties of the people.
This doctriue is not new, and yet it is modern in England, where the
right to the crown and its prerogatives have bled the people for fifteen
centuries. The stringent doctrine that a de facto government must be
established firmly and in all respects before it is entitled to recognition

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 Liliuokalani did not seem to take this narrow view of the revolution
 she had inaugurated.
 The banishment or death of the white people and the confiscation
 of their estates was the final decree recorded in the Queen's heart and
@@ Line 11: / Line 13: @@
 given to the rights and liberties of the people throughout this
 hemisphere, Americans should not hesitate in the support of a government
-de facto, set up to oppose her, because she had not made a formal
+''de facto'', set up to oppose her, because she had not made a formal
 surrender of a place where a few soldiers and policemen had been
 stationed, who were powerless to hold it against the people then under
@@ Line 18: / Line 20: @@
 existed in the executive Government of Hawaii, which was caused by
 the effort of the Queen to destroy the constitution of 1887, and by the
-act of the people in accepting her will for the completed coup d'etat,
+act of the people in accepting her will for the completed ''coup d'etat'',
 and, in making that the occasion for supplying the executive department
 of the Government with a chief.
 A careful investigation has failed to show that any conspiracy now
 exists that is directed to the virtual displacement of the Provisional Government.
@@ Line 44: / Line 47: @@
 to convince Mr. Willis that her restoration to the throne was impossible,
 and was not in accordance with her wishes.
 The President, on the first intimation of these harsh declarations of
 the Queen, at once laid them before Congress, and abandoned the
@@ Line 49: / Line 53: @@
 her and those who were conducting and supporting the Provisional
 Government.
 Mr. Willis, however, regarding his instructions as continuing to
 require his intercession beyond the point where the President considered
-that it should cease,, held a second and third interview with Liliuokalani.
+that it should cease, held a second and third interview with Liliuokalani.
 After these interviews had closed, the Queen being still
 firm in her course, Mr. Carter, a trusted friend, obtained her signature
 to a pledge of amnesty, and made that the basis of his proposition
+{{p|379}}
 to Mr. Dole for the abandonment of the Provisional Government, which
-was summarily refused. This closed that incident. Mr. Willis, in
+was summarily refused. This closed that incident.  Mr. Willis, in
 what he did, obeyed what he conceived to be his instructions, and being
 so distant from Washington, it is a matter of regret, but not of surprise,
@@ Line 63: / Line 68: @@
 his interviews with Liliuokalani after the President had determined
 that the full duty of the Government had been performed.
 The attitude of Liliuokalani at the conclusion of this proceeding is
 that of waiting for a pleasant retirement from the cares of public life,
@@ Line 68: / Line 74: @@
 with the people who support the new order of government in
 Hawaii.
 In dealing with a grave subject, now for the first time presented in
 America, we must consider the conditions of public sentiment as to
@@ Line 87: / Line 94: @@
 temples, no just indignation at the cruelties that may have been perpetrated
 in their destruction could possibly justify their restoration.
 It is a great blessing to this Western World that the nations are to be
 spared the calamities which Blackstone describes as "imbruing the
-kingdom of England in blood and confusion," growing out of claims ot
+kingdom of England in blood and confusion," growing out of claims of
 succession to the crown. In almost every reign prior to that of the
 present house of Hanover, the lives and property of the people of
 England, amid the greatest cruelties, have been sacrificed in settling
-pretensions to the crown. It was these conflicts and this distress ot
+pretensions to the crown. It was these conflicts and this distress of
 innocent sufferers that caused the people to claim through the judges
 the protection of the doctrine, that service rendered to the king who
-held the scepter was lawful, althoughhe was not rightfully iu possession
+held the scepter was lawful, although he was not rightfully in possession
 of the crown. No greater liberty of the people was ever devised or
-granted than the right of protection under a king de facto against aking
+granted than the right of protection under a king ''de facto'' against a king
-de jure.
+''de jure''.
-I)e facto governments, when they seek to supply the gap created by
 an interregnum, are favored in the international law, and when they
 are also based on the right of popular government in conflict with regal
@@ Line 107: / Line 116: @@
 the foundations of the rightful authority to rule that it is justly to be
 ranked among the cardinal liberties of the people.
 This doctriue is not new, and yet it is modern in England, where the
 right to the crown and its prerogatives have bled the people for fifteen
-centuries. The stringent doctrine that a de facto government must be
+centuries. The stringent doctrine that a ''de facto'' government must be
 established firmly and in all respects before it is entitled to recognition