Template:812-813

-p812-

Hawaiian Legislature for no other reason than because I wished to do all that I could to assist the Hawaiian race, for whom I have great personal regard and aloha, in preserving if possible, a national government. I had an earnest desire to sustain the Hawaiian national institution. As I went through those sessions I was slowly convinced against my will of the difficulties of maintaining a monarchy, but it was not until the last revolutionary act of the Queen that I became convinced that a Hawaiian monarchy was inconsistent with the preservation of peace and prosperity and the protection of property in the islands. Until then I had never been an advocate of annexation to the United States, but had been opposed to it and had done all in my power to make it unnecessary.

I observed the landing of the United States forces on Monday evening; it was not done in pursuance of any request that I made myself, but I understood then that they were landed for the purpose of protecting the property and lives of Americans, but in no respect for the purpose of assisting the committee of safety.

Albert S. Wilcox.

Subscribed aud sworn to before me this 4th day of December, A. D. 1893.

[SEAL.]

Charles F. Peterson,
Notary Public.

AFFIDAVIT OF C. BOLTE.

C. Bolte, of Honolulu, being duly sworn, deposes and says:

That he was born in Bremen, in Germany, and is 41 years of age.

That he resided in Germany until 1878, when he came to Honolulu, where he has ever since resided.

That he is vice-president of the firm of M.S. Grinbaum & Company, a mercantile corporation, which has continuously existed as a firm and corporation, and has done business in Honolulu since 1866.

That he was interviewed by Mr. James H. Blount, American minister resident in June, 1893. That during this interview, on several occasions, he objected to the method employed by said Blount, and he remonstrated with him that he did not put his questions fairly. That said Blount asked his questions in a very leading form, and that on several occasions when affiant attempted to more fully express his meaning said Blount would change the subject and proceed to other matters.

That affiant, seeing that in his testimony the Queen, and the Government under the Queen, were being confounded, prepared a statement, a copy of which is as follows, and handed the same to said Blount in June last, and requested him to insert it in his report in the proper place; affiant at present being ignorant whether this was done or not.

"The answers which I have given to Mr. Blount's questions, 'When was for the first time anything said about deposing or dethroning the Queen' might lead to misunderstanding in reading this report. I desire, therefore, to hereby declare as follows: Words to the effect that the Queen must be deposed or dethroned were not uttered to my knowledge at any meeting of the committee of safety until Monday evening, January 16, 1893; but at the very first meeting of citizens at W. O. Smith's office on Saturday, January 14, at about 2 p. m., or even before this meeting had come to order, Paul Neumann informed the arriving people that the Queen was about to promulgate a new constitution. The answer then given him by Mr. W. C. Wilder, by me, and by

-p813-

others, was: That is a very good thing and a splendid opportunity to get rid of the whole old rotten Government concern and now to get annexation to the United States. Paul Neumann thought that that might be going a little too far.

"At the second meeting at W. O. Smith's, between 3 and 4 p. m. on Saturday afternoon, January 14, 1893, when the committee of safety was appointed, sentiments of the same nature, that this is a splendid opportunity to get rid of the old regime, and strong demands for annexation, or any kind of stable government under the supervision of the United States, were expressed

"Therefore, even if the words that the Queen must be deposed or dethroned were not spoken, surely the sentiment that this must be done prevailed at or even before the very first meeting, on January 14, 1893.

"Honolulu, June 1893.
"C. Bolte."
Dated Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands, December 4,1893.
C. Bolte.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 4th day of December, A. D. 1893.

[SEAL.]

Charles F. Peterson,
Notary Public.

AFFIDAVIT OF GEORGE N. WILCOX.

Honolulu, Oahu, ss.

My name is George N. Wilcox; I was born on the island of Hawaii in the year 1839 of American parents, who were missionaries in the Hawaiian Islands. My home since early childhood has been upon the island of Kauai. I was a representative from Kauai in the Legislature of 1880, and have since, as an elected Noble from the island of Kauai, served in four different sessions of the Legislature. In November of 1892 I was appointed by the Queen a member of her cabinet as minister of the interior, and remained such until by a majority vote of one of the Legislature the cabinet of which I was a member went out of office, on the 12th day of January last. On the 14th day of January last I was present in the afternoon at a meeting of the citizens of Honolulu in the law offices of W. O. Smith, where I learned from John F. Colburn, then the minister of the interior, that the Queen had attempted to force a new constitution, and that her ministers had refused to sign it and were ready to resist her attempt if the citizens would join in assisting them in their opposition.

The committee of safety was chosen at that meeting to take steps to preserve the public peace and secure the maintenance of law and order against the revolutionary acts of the sovereign. Up to that time I had, to the best of my ability, tried to sustain and support the Hawaiian monarchy, and especially in the interests of the Hawaiians to keep a clean and honest Government. Holding public office was something which was contrary to my personal wishes and interests; I had no personal objects to accomplish and no friends whose interests I sought to further, my sole desire being to help, as far as I could, to preserve the institutions of Hawaii; and it was not until that Saturday that I felt that the monarchy was no longer practicable, or able either to sustain itself or to be sustained by the intelligence of the country. No statement