1036-1037

From TheMorganReport
Jump to: navigation, search
Previous Page Next Page

Reports of Committee on Foreign Relations 1789-1901 Volume 6 pp1036-1037 300dpi scan (VERY LARGE!)

Text Only


-p1036-

Mr. Stalker. There was a party suggested it. I did not suggest to Mr. English, nor he to me, about coming here.

Senator Frye. Was anything said about Mr. English coming over and becoming a professor?

Mr. Stalker. We had some talk; yes-at least, I should say Mr. English made application to me with the view of securing a place; but I gave him no encouragement to think that he could secure a place.

Senator Frye. Did you state to anybody here that when you were at the Government buildings on the day that the proclamation was made you saw paraded in front of the Government buildings the American troops with their arms?

Mr. Stalker. I think not.

Senator Frye. Anything of that kind?

Mr. Stalker. I think not.

Senator Frye. Were you not informed that that statement could not be correct, because the testimony showed conclusively that the troops were back of Arion Hall, and were not in view of the Government Building?

Mr. Stalker. I think my testimony was to the effect that the troops were in line with their arms.

Senator Frye. I was not asking what you testified to. I asked you whether or not, previously to testifying before this committee, you stated to any one that our American troops were in front of the Government Building, drawn up in front of the Government Building with their guns, when the proclamation was being read?

Mr. Stalker. I did not.

Senator Frye. Anything of that kind?

Mr. Stalker. No; neither here nor elsewhere.

Senator Frye. And you were not told by anybody that that would not do, because the testimony showed that they were in the back yard of Arion Hall?

Mr. Stalker. No. Your statement is the first that I heard of any such suggestion.


Washington, D. C., Tuesday, January 30,1894.

The subcommittee met pursuant to adjournment.

Present. The chairman (Senator Morgan) and Senators Gray and Frye.

Absent. Senators Butler and Sherman.

SWORN STATEMENT OF P. W. REEDER.

The Chairman. Where do you reside and what is your age?

Mr. Reeder. I am 68 years of age and I reside at Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

The Chairman. Have you been in the Hawaiian Islands recently??

Mr. Reeder. I have.

The Chairman. When was that?

Mr. Reeder. Last winter.

The Chairman. How long a time did you stay there? Why did you go and when did you come away?

-p1037-

Mr. Reeder. I do not remember the dates; but it was during the months of November, December, January, and February.

The Chairman. Had you ever been there before?

Mr. Reeder. No.

The Chairman. I suppose you were there as a tourist?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. Did you spend much of your time in Honolulu or through the islands?

Mr. Reeder. Most of the time in Honolulu.

The Chairman. In what month did you get there?

Mr. Reeder. I was there fifteen weeks in all, not quite four months.

The Chairman. When you got there in November, did you ascertain or know whether there was any political excitement amongst the Hawaiian people?

Mr. Reeder. None that appeared on the surface.

The Chairman. Was there any question of grave importance politically that was under discussion among the people?

Mr. Reeder. There was not. When you went to the state house you could see there was friction between the parties.

The Chairman. What parties?

Mr. Reeder. They are divided there between what is called the native party and the missionary party. The missionary party now does not mean missionary per se-persons who go there to teach religion-but it is a party that has received that name because it is opposed to native rule.

The Chairman. Native rule or monarchical rule?

Mr. Reeder. That means native rule.

The Chairman. What particular measures were under discussion upon which these parties were divided?

Mr. Reeder. One thing which was in the Legislature there, and which gave rise to a good deal of ill feeling, was the discussion of the opium bill, and then the discussion of the lottery scheme. There were some men pushing their interests there-scheming for some sort of license to indulge in the practice of lottery.

The Chairman. Do you know who those men were-any of them?

Mr. Reeder. I did not know them; no. They were men, as I understand, from New Orleans.

The Chairman. Did you get the names of any of them?

Mr. Reeder. No, I did not.

The Chairman. But they were there for the purpose of pressing their plan for getting a charter, I suppose, for the lottery scheme?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. Did you understand that it was a part of the scheme that had been conducted in New Orleans?

Mr. Reeder. I understood that they were there for that same purpose.

The Chairman. Did the subject lead to much discussion among the people?

Mr. Reeder. It did; yes.

The Chairman. Was it acrimonious?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. Fierce, was it?

Mr. Reeder. Yes. Before the matter was adjusted finally the ladies thought they could intercept it between the time it passed the legislature and the time the signature was given by Liliuokalani, the Queen-thought they could intercept it by petition, and you could see by the


Previous Page Next Page