Difference between revisions of "Wasn't the Hawaiian Legation excluded from testimony?"
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
:pp. [[363-398#FIFTY-THIRD CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION.|363]] | :pp. [[363-398#FIFTY-THIRD CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION.|363]] | ||
| − | It would hardly have been appropriate to compel testimony from diplomats in the course of negotiations, so it wasn't done. | + | It would hardly have been appropriate to compel testimony from diplomats in the course of negotiations, or previously engaged in negotiations on the matter, so it wasn't done. |
Latest revision as of 14:37, 17 January 2006
Yes, the Hawaiian Legation (i.e., the United States governmental representatives in Hawaii, such as Minister Willis), were not compelled to testify. Neither were the diplomats from the Provisional Government of Hawaii.
However, this was not done to suppress adverse testimony. In fact, the entire Blount Report, and Blount himself, were presented at the hearings - both of which were highly critical of the Provisional Government and Minister Stevens. The reason for excluding the diplomatic corps of the U.S. to Hawaii and Hawaii to the U.S. was because negotiations were still ongoing.
- The committee did not call the Secretary of State, or any person connected with the Hawaiian Legation, to give testimony. It was not thought to be proper to question the diplomatic authorities of either government on matters that are, or have been, the subject of negotiation between them...
- pp. 363
It would hardly have been appropriate to compel testimony from diplomats in the course of negotiations, or previously engaged in negotiations on the matter, so it wasn't done.