Template:616-617 - Revision history

Jere Krischel at 09:23, 31 December 2005

2005-12-31T09:23:59Z

Jere Krischel at 09:23, 31 December 2005

2005-12-31T09:23:34Z

Ken Conklin at 19:55, 29 December 2005

2005-12-29T19:55:35Z

Jere Krischel at 18:53, 11 December 2005

2005-12-11T18:53:27Z

New page

616 HAWAIIAN ISLANDS.
industry to amount to anything specially, and that is the sugar industry—
sugar and rice.
Senator GRAY. HOW about the coffee industry?
Mr. SPALDING. They have tried to raise coffee, but the coffee has
been blighted. It may succeed better in the future—also tobacco.
In California they can raise grain and send it down there cheaper
than we can raise it; consequently we buy a good deal in California.
We get better potatoes from California. They can raise them cheaper
than we can. There is nothing that I know that can be raised cheaper
in Hawaii than it can be raised in any other country. Consequently,
even our sugar, without some kind of fostering protection, is not worth
much to us. But it has been remunerative to us under the reciprocity
treaty, and is remunerative to us now because of that treaty. 1 would
not to-day attempt to start a sugar plantation on the Sandwich Islands
any more than I would put my hand in the fire—I would not start a
factory there.
Senator GRAY. You do not think a republic would be a good form of
government for the people of that country who are now entitled to
suffrage?
Mr. SPALDING. NO.
Senator PRYB. With the suffrage practically universal?
• Mr. SPALDING. Not as it is now; under the constitution of 1S87.
Senator GRAY. Would you think the outlook for a republican form of
government better if the right of suffrage were more extensive?
Mr. SPALDING. No; I should think that the people there, from the circumstances
surrounding them, are not favorable to a republican form of
government. There is not enough interest in the country for a
republic—there are too many waves of prosperity and depression.
Senator PRYB. Suppose there were a limit to the suffrage ?
Mr. SPALDING. If you were to limit the suffrage, then you might have
a government which would, in my opinion be safe and advisable in the
proportion that it would be limited.
Senator FRYE. But that would not be a government of the people?
Mr. SPALDING. It would not.
Senator GRAY. The more narrow the suffrage, the more stable the
government.
Mr. SPALDING. Yes, because these people are like a good many in
the United States—better governed than governing.
Senator GRAY. They need to be governed?
Mr. SPALDING. I think so.
The CHAIRMAN. What do you think of the future success of Hawaii
as a government, having reference to the welfare of all classes in that
country, if that government—taking the constitution of 1887 as a
basis—should be placed in the hands of a native Kanaka dynasty?
Mr. SPALDING. If it were placed in the hands of a native Kanaka
dynasty it would probably run back to where it was when Capt. Cook
visited it.
The CHAIRMAN. YOU think those people need to be under control?
Mr. SPALDING. While the King has been on the throne the brains
of the white man have carried on the government.
Senator GRAY. YOU think they need an autocratic government?
Mr. SPALDING. We have now as near an approach to autocratic
government as anywhere. We have a council of fifteen, perhaps, composed
of the business men of Honolulu—some of them workingmeu,
some capitalists, but they are all business men of Honolulu. They go
HAWAIIAN ISLANDS. 617
np to the palace, which is now the official home of the cabinet—they
go up there perhaps every day and hold a session of an hour to examine
into the business of the country, just the same as is done in a large
factory or on a farm.
Senator GRAY. They control the Government?
Mr. SPALDING. They control it. They assemble—" now it is desired
to do so and so; what do you think about it?" They will appoint a
committee, if they think it necessary, or they will appoint some one to
do something, just as though the Legislature had passed a law to be
carried out by the officers of the people.
The CHAIRMAN. Coming back to my proposition again. You say
you do not think the restoration of the monarchy, with the native
Kanaka rulers on the throne, would be a success?
Mr. SPALDING. NO, without some backing.
The CHAIRMAN. I am talking of an independent government.
Mr. SPALDING. No.
The CHAIRMAN. It would not be to the interest of the people nor of
the investors who have spent their money there?
Mr. SPALDING. NO.
The CHAIRMAN. YOU think it would be difficult, if I get your idea,
either under a republican form of government, or dynastic or monarchical
form, to build up in the Hawaiian Islands a government that will
be equal to the commercial necessities of the Pacific Ocean?
Mr. SPALDING. Most decidedly so.
The CHAIRMAN. YOU are of that opinion?
Mr. SPALDING. Yes.
The CHAIRMAN. Suppose we should come to the point of the restoration
of the monarchy in Hawaii, would it be preferable that Liliuokalani
should be restored under existing conditions and surroundings, or
that Kaiulani should be restored?
Mr. SPALDING. I do not think—it would be a choice of evils; I do
not think it would make any difference. But I think it would be better
to have Kaiulani, for we generally prefer the ills we know not of to
those we do know.
The CHAIRMAN. Looking over this whole field and the possibility of
Kaiulani being restored to her rights, as alleged, what would be the
drift of the Government under her administration in respect of the influence
of the United States as compared with that of Great Britain?
Mr. SPALDING. If we had a sovereign on the throne?
The CHAIRMAN. Kaiulani.
Mr. SPALDING. I do not think we can have any sovereign on the
throne, either Kaiulani or anybody else, unless she go there for a purpose,
with the consent of the business interests of the country. I
think it either means that the business interests of the country shall
be overlooked, thrown one side, or kept in view and something done
for their benefit and protection. I think if a sovereign were put on
the throne and it should become again a monarchical form of government,
it would have to be under the protection of some strong x>ower,
and that strong power must be of a character that would give to these
interests, especially the sugar interests (which is the main industry of
the country) some compensation. It is requisite for the manufacture
of sugar to have two things: a favorable soil and climate and a favorable
condition of labor. If we had the same climate and the same
soiMiere in Washington that we have in Hawaii, we could not raise
sugar in Washington, because the negroes of Washington would charge

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 Senator {{sc|Gray.}} You do not think a republic would be a good form of government for the people of that country who are now entitled to suffrage?
-Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} NO.
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} No.
 Senator {{sc|Frye.}} With the suffrage practically universal?

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 industry to amount to anything specially, and that is the sugar industry— sugar and rice.
-Senator GRAY. How about the coffee industry?
+Senator {{sc|Gray.}} How about the coffee industry?
-Mr. SPALDING. They have tried to raise coffee, but the coffee has been blighted. It may succeed better in the future—also tobacco. In California they can raise grain and send it down there cheaper than we can raise it; consequently we buy a good deal in California. We get better potatoes from California. They can raise them cheaper than we can. There is nothing that I know that can be raised cheaper in Hawaii than it can be raised in any other country. Consequently, even our sugar, without some kind of fostering protection, is not worth much to us. But it has been remunerative to us under the reciprocity treaty, and is remunerative to us now because of that treaty. I would not to-day attempt to start a sugar plantation on the Sandwich Islands any more than I would put my hand in the fire—I would not start a factory there.
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} They have tried to raise coffee, but the coffee has been blighted. It may succeed better in the future—also tobacco. In California they can raise grain and send it down there cheaper than we can raise it; consequently we buy a good deal in California. We get better potatoes from California. They can raise them cheaper than we can. There is nothing that I know that can be raised cheaper in Hawaii than it can be raised in any other country. Consequently, even our sugar, without some kind of fostering protection, is not worth much to us. But it has been remunerative to us under the reciprocity treaty, and is remunerative to us now because of that treaty. I would not to-day attempt to start a sugar plantation on the Sandwich Islands any more than I would put my hand in the fire—I would not start a factory there.
-Senator GRAY. You do not think a republic would be a good form of government for the people of that country who are now entitled to suffrage?
+Senator {{sc|Gray.}} You do not think a republic would be a good form of government for the people of that country who are now entitled to suffrage?
-Mr. SPALDING. NO.
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} NO.
-Senator FRYE. With the suffrage practically universal?
+Senator {{sc|Frye.}} With the suffrage practically universal?
-Mr. SPALDING. Not as it is now; under the constitution of 1887.
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} Not as it is now; under the constitution of 1887.
-Senator GRAY. Would you think the outlook for a republican form of government better if the right of suffrage were more extensive?
+Senator {{sc|Gray.}} Would you think the outlook for a republican form of government better if the right of suffrage were more extensive?
-Mr. SPALDING. No; I should think that the people there, from the circumstances surrounding them, are not favorable to a republican form of government. There is not enough interest in the country for a republic—there are too many waves of prosperity and depression.
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} No; I should think that the people there, from the circumstances surrounding them, are not favorable to a republican form of government. There is not enough interest in the country for a republic—there are too many waves of prosperity and depression.
-Senator FRYE. Suppose there were a limit to the suffrage?
+Senator {{sc|Frye.}} Suppose there were a limit to the suffrage?
-Mr. SPALDING. If you were to limit the suffrage, then you might have a government which would, in my opinion be safe and advisable in the proportion that it would be limited.
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} If you were to limit the suffrage, then you might have a government which would, in my opinion be safe and advisable in the proportion that it would be limited.
-Senator FRYE. But that would not be a government of the people?
+Senator {{sc|Frye.}} But that would not be a government of the people?
-Mr. SPALDING. It would not.
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} It would not.
-Senator GRAY. The more narrow the suffrage, the more stable the government.
+Senator {{sc|Gray.}} The more narrow the suffrage, the more stable the government.
-Mr. SPALDING. Yes, because these people are like a good many in the United States—better governed than governing.
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} Yes, because these people are like a good many in the United States—better governed than governing.
-Senator GRAY. They need to be governed?
+Senator {{sc|Gray.}} They need to be governed?
-Mr. SPALDING. I think so.
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} I think so.
-The CHAIRMAN. What do you think of the future success of Hawaii as a government, having reference to the welfare of all classes in that country, if that government—taking the constitution of 1887 as a basis—should be placed in the hands of a native Kanaka dynasty?
+The {{sc|Chairman.}} What do you think of the future success of Hawaii as a government, having reference to the welfare of all classes in that country, if that government—taking the constitution of 1887 as a basis—should be placed in the hands of a native Kanaka dynasty?
-Mr. SPALDING. If it were placed in the hands of a native Kanaka dynasty it would probably run back to where it was when Capt. Cook visited it.
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} If it were placed in the hands of a native Kanaka dynasty it would probably run back to where it was when Capt. Cook visited it.
-The CHAIRMAN. You think those people need to be under control?
+The {{sc|Chairman.}} You think those people need to be under control?
-Mr. SPALDING. While the King has been on the throne the brains of the white man have carried on the government.
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} While the King has been on the throne the brains of the white man have carried on the government.
-Senator GRAY. You think they need an autocratic government?
+Senator {{sc|Gray.}} You think they need an autocratic government?
-Mr. SPALDING. We have now as near an approach to autocratic government as anywhere. We have a council of fifteen, perhaps, composed of the business men of Honolulu—some of them workingmen, some capitalists, but they are all business men of Honolulu. They go
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} We have now as near an approach to autocratic government as anywhere. We have a council of fifteen, perhaps, composed of the business men of Honolulu—some of them workingmen, some capitalists, but they are all business men of Honolulu. They go
 {{p|617}}
@@ Line 51: / Line 51: @@
 up to the palace, which is now the official home of the cabinet—they go up there perhaps every day and hold a session of an hour to examine into the business of the country, just the same as is done in a large factory or on a farm.
-Senator GRAY. They control the Government?
+Senator {{sc|Gray.}} They control the Government?
-Mr. SPALDING. They control it. They assemble—"now it is desired to do so and so; what do you think about it?" They will appoint a committee, if they think it necessary, or they will appoint some one to do something, just as though the Legislature had passed a law to be carried out by the officers of the people.
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} They control it. They assemble—"now it is desired to do so and so; what do you think about it?" They will appoint a committee, if they think it necessary, or they will appoint some one to do something, just as though the Legislature had passed a law to be carried out by the officers of the people.
-The CHAIRMAN. Coming back to my proposition again. You say you do not think the restoration of the monarchy, with the native Kanaka rulers on the throne, would be a success?
+The {{sc|Chairman.}} Coming back to my proposition again. You say you do not think the restoration of the monarchy, with the native Kanaka rulers on the throne, would be a success?
-Mr. SPALDING. No, without some backing.
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} No, without some backing.
-The CHAIRMAN. I am talking of an independent government.
+The {{sc|Chairman.}} I am talking of an independent government.
-Mr. SPALDING. No.
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} No.
-The CHAIRMAN. It would not be to the interest of the people nor of the investors who have spent their money there?
+The {{sc|Chairman.}} It would not be to the interest of the people nor of the investors who have spent their money there?
-Mr. SPALDING. No.
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} No.
-The CHAIRMAN. You think it would be difficult, if I get your idea, either under a republican form of government, or dynastic or monarchical form, to build up in the Hawaiian Islands a government that will be equal to the commercial necessities of the Pacific Ocean?
+The {{sc|Chairman.}} You think it would be difficult, if I get your idea, either under a republican form of government, or dynastic or monarchical form, to build up in the Hawaiian Islands a government that will be equal to the commercial necessities of the Pacific Ocean?
-Mr. SPALDING. Most decidedly so.
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} Most decidedly so.
-The CHAIRMAN. You are of that opinion?
+The {{sc|Chairman.}} You are of that opinion?
-Mr. SPALDING. Yes.
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} Yes.
-The CHAIRMAN. Suppose we should come to the point of the restoration of the monarchy in Hawaii, would it be preferable that Liliuokalani should be restored under existing conditions and surroundings, or that Kaiulani should be restored?
+The {{sc|Chairman.}} Suppose we should come to the point of the restoration of the monarchy in Hawaii, would it be preferable that Liliuokalani should be restored under existing conditions and surroundings, or that Kaiulani should be restored?
-Mr. SPALDING. I do not think—it would be a choice of evils; I do not think it would make any difference. But I think it would be better to have Kaiulani, for we generally prefer the ills we know not of to those we do know.
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} I do not think—it would be a choice of evils; I do not think it would make any difference. But I think it would be better to have Kaiulani, for we generally prefer the ills we know not of to those we do know.
-The CHAIRMAN. Looking over this whole field and the possibility of Kaiulani being restored to her rights, as alleged, what would be the drift of the Government under her administration in respect of the influence of the United States as compared with that of Great Britain?
+The {{sc|Chairman.}} Looking over this whole field and the possibility of Kaiulani being restored to her rights, as alleged, what would be the drift of the Government under her administration in respect of the influence of the United States as compared with that of Great Britain?
-Mr. SPALDING. If we had a sovereign on the throne?
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} If we had a sovereign on the throne?
-The CHAIRMAN. Kaiulani.
+The {{sc|Chairman.}} Kaiulani.
-Mr. SPALDING. I do not think we can have any sovereign on the throne, either Kaiulani or anybody else, unless she go there for a purpose, with the consent of the business interests of the country. I think it either means that the business interests of the country shall be overlooked, thrown one side, or kept in view and something done for their benefit and protection. I think if a sovereign were put on the throne and it should become again a monarchical form of government, it would have to be under the protection of some strong power, and that strong power must be of a character that would give to these interests, especially the sugar interests (which is the main industry of the country) some compensation. It is requisite for the manufacture of sugar to have two things: a favorable soil and climate and a favorable condition of labor. If we had the same climate and the same soil here in Washington that we have in Hawaii, we could not raise sugar in Washington, because the negroes of Washington would charge
+Mr. {{sc|Spalding.}} I do not think we can have any sovereign on the throne, either Kaiulani or anybody else, unless she go there for a purpose, with the consent of the business interests of the country. I think it either means that the business interests of the country shall be overlooked, thrown one side, or kept in view and something done for their benefit and protection. I think if a sovereign were put on the throne and it should become again a monarchical form of government, it would have to be under the protection of some strong power, and that strong power must be of a character that would give to these interests, especially the sugar interests (which is the main industry of the country) some compensation. It is requisite for the manufacture of sugar to have two things: a favorable soil and climate and a favorable condition of labor. If we had the same climate and the same soil here in Washington that we have in Hawaii, we could not raise sugar in Washington, because the negroes of Washington would charge