1036-1051

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

-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

-p1038-

tone of the people there that it had produced a good deal of violent feeling upon the part of those English-speaking people there.

The Chairman. They were opposed to it?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. How did the native Kanaka population seem to be disposed toward it?

Mr. Reeder. I could not understand very much about that, because I could not speak their language. But they quietly acquiesced in it.

The Chairman. I suppose they are a quiet kind of people?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. Disposed to acquiesce in matters that they can not easily reverse or prevent?

Mr. Reeder. They would rather lie down and enjoy themselves under a tree than engage in any industry-as a rule.

The Chairman. They have not the energy or the scope of the Anglo-Saxon, the Frenchman, German, or Portuguese?

Mr. Reeder. No.

The Chairman. Who, did you understand, was promoting this lottery scheme amongst the governing authorities there, the cabinet, the Queen, and any other persons?

Mr. Reeder. The native names there are so strange that I did not get the names, but I understood it was a good many of the house or the legislative body-the native men of the legislative body. I understood further that there was this about it: it was for the purpose of relieving themselves-creating a revenue-relieving themselves from debt and creating a source by which some money could be obtained. I believe that was the reason assigned by the Queen-that she had to have it to get more money.

The Chairman. On the part of the Queen you understood it to be a revenue measure?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. Do you remember what offers they made-in order to induce the Government to grant the charter?

Mr. Reeder. No, I do not remember. I will say another thing in that connection. In the Legislature it was bandied back and forward among the natives that they had been bribed. There are two houses there, the house of commons or representatives and the house of nobles, and they would get into heated debates, and one would cast up to the other that they had received bribes.

The Chairman. Did they have an interpreter there?

Mr. Reeder. Yes. A native would make his speech in his native language and then the interpreter would repeat it in English.

The Chairman. Did you attend the meetings of this Legislative Assembly?

Mr. Reeder. Oh, yes.

The Chairman. You spoke of two Houses. You do not mean they were separate bodies?

Mr. Reeder. No; they all met together, but they were designated as such-House of Nobles and House of Representatives.

The Chairman. They sat together?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. Were these accusations of bribery and corruption freely made in the House?

Mr. Reeder. Yes; especially when the debate would go along until it became heated.

The Chairman. So that the men who were resisting the grant of

-p1039-

this concession to the lottery people were charging the other side with bribery and corruption, if I understand you?

Mr. Reeder. The natives would do it among themselves.

Senator Frye. Charge each other?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. But I understand the accusations came from those who were opposed to the granting of the lottery charter.

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. They charged that those persons who were promoting or advancing this lottery scheme were bribed?

Mr. Reeder. Yes; that was the charge.

The Chairman. Did those charges produce any collision amongst those people?

Mr. Reeder. No; not that I saw.

The Chairman. Was there much anger exhibited?

Mr. Reeder. Yes; a good deal.

The Chairman. How did you understand that the Queen and cabinet were disposed toward this lottery business?

Mr. Reeder. I do not know that I could give you an intelligent answer in regard to that.

The Chairman. I mean what you gathered from general reputation in the community. Was it understood that the Queen and her cabinet-I mean the first cabinet that was there while you were in the islands-or the later one?

Mr. Reeder. This came up for action in the last days of the Legislature. You see the council, the legislative body, sat from May for about eight or nine months, I guess, and this was during the time I was there, and I did not get there until November.

The Chairman. Did you find this subject rife when you got there?

Mr. Reeder. No; but it was soon developed.

The Chairman. And the movement was made in the Legislature?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. Did you understand that the cabinet which was there when you got there-the Wilcox-Jones cabinet-was favorable to or opposing this lottery bill?

Mr. Reeder. I did not know about that. The trouble that arose about the Wilcox-Jones cabinet arose mainly from some other things.

The Chairman. What were they? Proceed and state those other things to which you refer.

Mr. Reeder. As I understand the history (and I learned it from them) there had been constant friction there over this thing which they had conceded in the constitution of 1887.

The Chairman. You do not mean that they had conceded the lottery?

Mr. Reeder. No; that lottery business was developed after I got there.

The Chairman. Go on and make your statement.

Mr. Reeder. Up to 1887 they had a constitution which granted to the kings (who were the five Kamehamehas and Lunalilo, who followed them) this thing that they had conceded, which was the appointing power of the house of nobles, which house of nobles represented one-third of the body. This body was, I think, about 52 members, and 17 of them belonged to the house of nobles. The King, Kalakaua, had surrendered that right. They made that elective-of the house of nobles 17 members were made elective by the people. But they had made another property qualification-I mean these two parties to the constitution-which was that any man who could prove that he had $600 income, either from his

-p1040-

own personal efforts or something that grew out of some investment he made, could exercise the right of suffrage or could vote for a member of the house of nobles.

The Chairman. Did you find when you got to Honolulu that the question of returning to the old regime-the old method of appointing nobles-was one of the subjects under discussion by the people?

Mr. Reeder. Yes, sir; that was it.

The Chairman. Who was contending for that?

Mr. Reeder. The Queen and native party.

The Chairman. You speak of the native party. Do you mean all the natives?

Mr. Reeder. Let me explain that. The heads of the departments were Americans or the descendants of Americans, and their employes, as a rule, were natives.

The Chairman. You are speaking of the Queen's cabinet?

Mr. Reeder. No; I am speaking of the heads of the departments.

The Chairman. These were appointed by the Queen's administration?

Mr. Reeder. The heads of the departments?

The Chairman. Yes.

Mr. Reeder. I do not know how they got their appointments.

The Chairman. They were not elected by the people?

Mr. Reeder. No.

The Chairman. Therefore they must have been appointed by the Crown or the Legislature. I suppose they were appointed by the Crown.

Mr. Reeder. I do not know about that-how they received their appointments. The men who were in the employ were, as a rule, favorable to the Government; that is, the government which had found its authority in the constitution of 1887. Then you will find a good many Americans who were doing business in the city, and who, if they had clerks, as a rule those clerks would talk for the Government. That was the native part that was talking for the Government and that part of the natives. That is my experience.

The Chairman. I suppose you do not know, not being acquainted with any of the people, what was the sentiment among the common, ordinary Kanakas on that question?

Mr. Reeder. Yes; I do.

The Chairman. State how you found it.

Mr. Reeder. The larger body of the native people talked for native rule, and felt aggrieved because it had passed into the hands of the Americans. I had two sources of information: There was one place situated on the corner of Nuuanu avenue and Beretania street, which had been in the early years a place of resort for the Crown or Government. It was called Emma House or Emma Square. It is now occupied particularly as the headquarters of the common Kanakas. That is one of the places where I daily went. They keep a sort of reading room, and the natives would gather to discuss their affairs, and I could hear the sentiment there of a good deal of the middle or lower classes of Kanakas.

The Chairman. Did a good many of them assemble there?

Mr. Reeder. Yes; a good many.

The Chairman. Who spoke English?

Mr. Reeder. Yes; a good many who did. Then I made it a subject of inquiry; if any man was a prominent man, I asked what he said.

-p1041-

The Chairman. What purpose had you in studying these problems of politics in Hawaii?

Mr. Reeder. That is one of the things I like, to find out what is going on.

The Chairman. Was that the purpose for which you were there?

Mr. Reeder. I write sometimes for the newspapers.

The Chairman. Are you a correspondent for a newspaper?

Mr. Reeder. I could not say that I was a hired correspondent; I wrote some articles and sent them home.

The Chairman. What paper did you send them to?

Mr. Reeder. I sent them to our papers. I am quite well acquainted with the people of the Cedar Rapids Republican and the Cedar Rapids Times.

The Chairman. Then you were gaining information for the purpose of being able to write those letters to the newspapers?

Mr. Reeder. Yes; I do not want to say that, but it was one of the things looked to.

The Chairman. But you had no connection politically with any thing in Hawaii?

Mr. Reeder. No.

The Chairman. No business connection with anybody?

Mr. Reeder. No; not a thing above ground.

The Chairman. Simply a tourist looking over the country?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. Do you think from the people you heard speaking at this meeting room which you have mentioned, and your imperfect knowledge of the Hawaiian tongue, you could gather the real sentiment of the Kanaka population on the subject of this lottery?

Mr. Reeder. I do not know whether I could say that much or not. I do not understand that the lottery business was extensively discussed amongst them-that is, the middle and lower classes.

The Chairman. Those you heard speak of it, were they in favor of or against the lottery?

Mr. Reeder. Some of them-they were divided; I think a good many of them were opposed to it.

The Chairman. I suppose it was really a question between public morality and governmental revenue?

Mr. Reeder. Yes; those were the points.

The Chairman. The white people, men of business and men of property, were opposed to using that scheme for the purpose of raising revenue?

Mr. Reeder. I think so; I think that was true.

The Chairman. On moral grounds?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. Did you detect any other movement, or anything in what they did or said to indicate that they had any purpose of trying to deprive the Hawaiian people of any just right that they might wish to enjoy, and from which they might derive a profit; or were they really in good earnest in trying to preserve proper morality in the administration of Government?

Mr. Reeder. I had no reason to suspect that they were dishonest. I had no reason to suppose that they opposed the scheme of lottery on any other grounds than that. It might have been to the Government a source of revenue; but they opposed it somehow or other.

The Chairman. There was an opium bill pending before that Legislature while you were there?

S. Doc. 231, pt 6----66

-p1042-

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. What did you gather from common report and common rumor as to the purposes and provisions and characteristics of that bill?

Mr. Reeder. That followed very much the same train of thought. The people were divided on it for about the same reasons-for the same purposes on both sides.

The Chairman. I suppose the purpose of introducing opium there was to cater to the habits of the Chinese who were there?

Mr. Reeder. It was freely talked there that they would be great patrons. In fact, they had several places open then for the purpose of administering the drug.

The Chairman. Is there a Chinatown in Honolulu?

Mr. Reeder. Yes; distinctively so.

The Chairman. Like it is in San Francisco?

Mr. Reeder. Yes; the same as they have in San Francisco.

The Chairman. Are there many Chinese collected together in that part of the city of Honolulu?

Mr. Reeder. Pretty much all the Chinese there are in that part of the city.

The Chairman. Crowded together in that area [indicating on map]?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. Have you been in Chinatown frequently?

Mr. Reeder. Yes, frequently.

The Chairman. What would you say as to the number of persons congregated there?

Mr. Reeder. It would be a mere guess, but I would say to you I suppose perhaps 3,000. That is the west there, and Chinatown proper is on the west side of Honolulu. There is one street there as a rule, which divides them. Of course there are persons scattered around one place or another who are Chinamen, but off in this direction toward the Kamehameha Museum----

The Chairman. Is that toward the east or west?

Mr. Reeder. Toward the west; it is west of Nuuanu avenue, principally along in this direction. They are from right back here where the ground falls off [indicating]. Then there is out here what is called the Insane Asylum. In this direction here there is a great scope of land which winds around what is called the Receiving Hospital, and all this here is covered with rice plantations and vegetable patches. That is largely made up of Chinese. This portion of the town-I do not know whether it comes up so far; I think it is one street west.

The Chairman. Then you would say that this portion of the town between Smith street and the western boundary of the town is occupied largely by Chinamen?

Mr. Reeder. Yes. Then in the town there is an area on Nuuanu avenue. This [indicating] is occupied by tailors, by shoemakers, by butchers, who cater to the wants of the people.

The Chairman. Of the Chinese?

Mr. Reeder. Yes; and all who choose to patronize them.

The Chairman. What do those Chinese in Honolulu seem to be principally engaged in for a living?

Mr. Reeder. The great body of the Chinese are out on the sugar plantations.

The Chairman. I speak of those in Honolulu.

Mr. Reeder. Those in Honolulu are engaged there in rice culture or as vegetable growers, and those that are right in the city proper are

-p1043-

engaged in the tailoring business largely, and the shoemaking business. It is principally taken up by shoemakers and tailors and merchants and restaurant keepers.

The Chairman. They have little shops and stores?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. As a rule, are the Chinese people an orderly and well-behaved people?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. Fond of gambling?

Mr. Reeder. Oh, yes; that is one of their industries.

The Chairman. Do they have opium joints amongst them?

Mr. Reeder. They have a few, but as a rule not public. It is not a business recognized there.

The Chairman. The law opposes it?

Mr. Reeder. I could not say that; I think likely-I do not know about that.

The Chairman. But it is a business not openly adopted?

Mr. Reeder. No; not on a front street. It is a place usually a little off, very small place. I understood that there were two or three of them in town.

The Chairman. In passing through Chinatown in Honolulu, did you gain the idea that the Chinese were contributing much to the moral support and advancement of Hawaii, or was the tendency the other way?

Mr. Reeder. I did not gather very much about it. They behave themselves. They are not very much in the police court, and they have not to be dealt with very much.

The Chairman. Do they take anything like an active, strong, prominent position like the white race in Honolulu?

Mr. Reeder. They do not.

The Chairman. They are there like they are everywhere else where they are assembled-where you have seen them in this hemisphere- people who seem to be devoting themselves to their own callings, indulging themselves in their habits of gambling and opium smoking, and such like?

Mr. Reeder.They are just like they are in San Francisco.

The Chairman. Are there any public moralities conducted amongst them?

Mr. Reeder. I could not answer that. I have no knowledge that I know of. I will say they have a joss house there, and then they have what is called a Young Men's Christian Association, and they make some effort of improving their people.

The Chairman. Would you think that the free introduction of opium amongst those people would create any insecurity as to the peace and order and proper government of the islands?

Mr. Reeder. The Chinese would be principally the patrons of such places. I do not know that that would create much disorder. They go to those places and have their smoke out and their debauch and then go away. After the debauch is over they go about their business on the street; there does not seem to be very much about it.

The Chairman. Do you think the better classes of Honolulu were putting themselves to unnecessary trouble in trying to prevent the introduction of opium into that city?

Mr. Reeder. No; I think it was pushed principally by the native men in that Legislative Assembly.

-p1044-

The Chairman. You mean the measure to license the introduction of opium?

Mr. Reeder. Yes. It was done largely for revenue for the islands.

The Chairman. Did you gather from the people there that they thought that was a rather dangerous enterprise for the public morality and the maintenance of the law?

Mr. Reeder. Yes. The men who were opposed to it were opposed to it from those considerations.

The Chairman. Were they very earnest about it?

Mr. Reeder. They seemed to be. The ladies were more earnest than anybody else.

The Chairman. I suppose they were fearing the demoralization of their sons.

Mr. Reeder. I think that was amongst the things. They had a large petition. You could see by the names on it that they were Americans-at least, not Chinese.

The Chairman. Did you see any demonstration amongst what we call the white population in Hawaii-Americans, Germans, English or what not-that seemed to lead in the direction of the demoralization of those people or the imposing upon them of unjust or improper restrictions of law?

Mr. Reeder. I think I can say that I did see some things which I opposed very much all my life. For instance, there is this: there are a good many white men who are living there with Kanaka women to whom they are not married-a good many of them. But I do not know of any leading legislator or any leading man there who had his family with him who was addicted to this practice.

The Chairman. Can you say that any such irregularities of life as those to which you have alluded have received partial encouragement or even toleration on the part of what we call the white population?

Mr. Reeder. By a good many of the middle and lower classes. Do you consider that former question was answered? I would divide that question. Let it be read until I say stop.

The question was read as follows:

"Did you see any demonstration amongst what we call the white population in Hawaii-Americans, Germans, English, and what not-that seemed to lead in the direction of the demoralization of those people?"

Mr. Reeder. From that last sentence-"demoralization of those people." There are a good many men there living with Kanaka women to whom they are not married. Some of them were living there long enough to have families by them, and still recognize themselves as not married-and still recognize that the marriage vow was not obligatory upon them. That was true of a good many of the Chinese; they were living with the Kanaka women, and so were some of the Portuguese. I do not think these practices obtain amongst the better elements of the population of Honolulu, or that they were tolerated or encouraged by them.

The Chairman. In the discussions that you heard there among the people, do you remember whether the question came up as to the necessity of getting rid of the cabinet in order to be able to carry this opium bill and this lottery bill into effect?

Mr. Reeder. I do not think that there was. The main thing that they had there troubles on was another issue. The Queen was struggling to get the ascendency for the purpose of promoting these things-a return to the native rule, already explained.

-p1045-

Senator Frye. That is, the Queen and her people were trying to get rid of the constitution of 1887, which imposed restrictions upon her and her cabinet?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

Senator Frye. Was this opium bill and this lottery bill part of the campaign-to get the Kanaka population to do away with the constitution of 1887?

Mr. Reeder. I do not think they had any design of that kind. I think those two bills were for revenue. I think it was said by the Queen that she was embarrassed and the Government was embarrassed on account of its debt.

The Chairman. Did you understand that the debt was a very large one?

Mr. Reeder. Yes, it was large for that place. It amounted to almost $4,000,000-when pay day for the interest came it would amount to very nearly $4,000,000.

The Chairman. I suppose you are not familiar with the facts in regard to the burden of taxation in Hawaii, to know upon whom it falls?

Mr. Reeder. Fell upon the property.

The Chairman. Who owned the property-I mean, of course, the property that would yield revenue?

Mr. Reeder. I think there was a large amount gathered from the sugar plantations.

Senator Frye. The chairman asked who owned the property. Did not the white men own nine-tenths of it?

Mr. Reeder. I think so; yes, eight-tenths.

The Chairman. Do you know any Kanakas or half-whites who owned any large sugar estates?

Mr. Reeder. No; but there were men in business there who were half-whites, who owned stock in some of those companies.

The Chairman. But, if I gather your idea, the great burden of taxation rested upon white men who owned the property?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. Did you see any disposition or detect any disposition amongst those people to do, or to attempt to do, anything else than protect themselves against unjust legislation, legislation that was wicked in its character, and that tended to break down the authority of law and good morals?

Mr. Reeder. I do not know that I could interpret the action of the white people as having anything to do especially in that direction.

The Chairman. Have you any personal knowledge of the facts that tended toward the recent revolution?

Mr. Reeder. I have some, gathered in the way that we have been talking about.

The Chairman. You were there an observer.

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. Were you in the Legislature-I mean the hall where the Legislature sat-on the Saturday that it was prorogued by the Queen?

Mr. Reeder. I was not; no.

The Chairman. You were not there at that time?

Mr. Reeder. I was not there at 12 o'clock; no.

The Chairman. Did you go to the Government building that afternoon?

-p1046-

Mr. Reeder. No; I was not in the Government building; I was there in the vicinity.

The Chairman. At what time did you first get the impression that the political movement that had been started in Hawaii or in Honolulu would result in dethroning the Queen and the establishment of a new government?

Mr. Reeder. I had no means of knowing. Things moved along pretty rapidly. I had no means of knowing when that point arrived-when she would be dethroned.

The Chairman. That does not answer my question. I want to know when you first heard the rumor that there was a movement on foot to dethrone the Queen.

Mr. Reeder. I absolutely did not get that impression until Tuesday; it did not develop itself until Tuesday, the 17th.

The Chairman. What was the information which you received on Tuesday, which you say led you to the conclusion that there was a revolution on foot which would result in dethroning the Queen?

Mr. Reeder. On Tuesday the proclamation for a new government was read.

The Chairman. Was that the first information that you had about it?

Mr. Reeder. I had been keeping track of it all along, but that was the first information that I secured that was evidence to me that the Queen was to be dethroned.

The Chairman. I suppose you would say that that was the first time you believed or felt that the movement was really a serious one?

Mr. Reeder. Yes; that was the first time.

The Chairman. Although, I believe from your statements, you bad heard some intimations of it or discussion about it?

Mr. Reeder. No; I heard no intimation.

The Chairman. Nothing at all?

Mr. Reeder. Nothing at all; because the meetings of the committee of safety were kept secret, and at that meeting on Monday afternoon at 2 o'clock there were certain speeches made in which there was not an intimation of any kind that I could gather that they were designing anything of that kind.

The Chairman. You heard those speeches?

Mr. Reeder. Not all of them.

The Chairman. You heard some?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

The Chairman. Did you mix in the crowd?

Mr. Reeder. I was around and amongst the crowd.

The Chairman. How many English-speaking people did you hear converse?

Mr. Reeder. There were two meetings. You are speaking of the one conducted on the part of the revolutionists?

The Chairman. Yes.

Mr. Reeder. They were pretty much all English-speaking people.

The Chairman. You did not gather, if I understand you correctly, at that meeting, from speeches or conversations that you heard in the crowd, that the movement to dethrone the Queen at the time of that meeting was a serious one?

Mr. Reeder. No; I did not gather that they had determined on that project at that time. In fact, there was nothing said of it in the seven speeches. After the seven speeches, all went along in the line of complaints.

-p1047-

The Chairman. Of what?

Mr. Reeder. Complaints that the Government of the Queen was not a suitable Government; that she had been refusing all along to keep within bounds of the authority of the constitution.

The Chairman. Of the constitution of 1887?

Mr. Reeder. Of 1887-that there had been, I think they said, seven uprisings in five years of one kind or another-I could not particularize what they were, and that the Government was not a stable one; that she could not give one; that there was too much friction. That was the line of the speeches.

The Chairman. Did you hear any statements made by the speakers, or did the persons in the crowd make any, to the effect that the Queen had attempted to abrogate the constitution of 1887 and substitute for it one of her own ?

Mr. Reeder. I heard nothing except what grew out of the talk. She got up on the portico of Iolani palace----

The Chairman. You did not hear that; you were not there.

Mr. Reeder. You are speaking of what I know personally?

Senator Gray. And impressions that you gathered from actual contact with the people.

The Chairman. In this public meeting, in this crowd in which you mixed, did you hear any statement as to a matter of fact that the Queen had attempted to abrogate the constitution of 1887 and substitute for it one of her own getting up?

Mr. Reeder. Yes; that was the talk in that meeting-that was part of the complaint.

The Chairman. Was there any complaint in those speeches about the opium bill and the lottery bill?

Mr. Reeder. Yes, they were talked of, too.

The Chairman. Was anything said about voting out the cabinet?

Mr. Reeder. Yes, that was talked of, too. That was part of the complaint.

The Chairman. A sort of enumeration of grievances?

Mr. Reeder. Yes. The speeches were not very long. The whole meeting did not last to exceed an hour and a half. They opened at 2 o'clock and adjourned at a half after 3.

The Chairman. That was before you formed a definite conclusion that there was to be a revolution there?

Mr. Reeder. Yes. I was not informed that they were going to overturn the Government. On Tuesday afternoon I came to the conclusion that there was going to be something done. As I understood it, they read from the steps of the Government building this proclamation----

Senator Frye. Were you there?

Mr. Reeder. No; I was not right there.

The Chairman. Were you out in view of Iolani Palace at the time the Queen was up on the palace somewhere, the portico, and presented some constitution and made some speech to her people?

Mr. Reeder. I was near there, but I could not understand the language; she did not present a constitution; she made a speech.

The Chairman. Was there a large crowd about the Queen at that time?

Mr. Reeder. The crowd in both places seemed just about alike as to numbers.

The Chairman. I spoke of that occasion. Was there a large crowd about Iolani Palace at the time the Queen appeared on the portico-whatever you may call it?

-p1048-

Mr. Reeder. I do not know what you call a large crowd. It is only a guess; there might have been 1,200 to 1,300 people there.

The Chairman. Did you see any military array, any troops drawn up in line under arms?

Mr. Reeder. No.

The Chairman. Was the crowd to which the Queen was speaking excited?

Mr. Reeder. I do not know; they did not seem to be; there was a good deal of earnestness about it.

The Chairman. Did the Kanaka population exhibit any more excitement than the balance of the people?

Mr. Reeder. I did not see it. The truth of it was there was nothing but the Kanaka population there, I guess.

The Chairman. Have you any special knowledge about what occurred in Honolulu during the period of that revolution? I would like to know what you know about it; what your observations were.

Mr. Reeder. At between 2 and 3 o'clock on Tuesday afternoon the proclamation was read. Now I was not there at that, but I was out where I could see a good deal of a crowd. There was only a handful there, comparatively, to me. And then following that the marines came up and took their station near the premises, or near, between the two houses a little away from the gates. There were three roads that came up from the west end of the town, and is a pretty large three-cornered square, is there, and they took possession of the square-each of the three roads up into the city. That was on Monday.

Senator Gray. In the afternoon?

Mr. Reeder. Afternoon-close to 5 o'clock-late in the afternoon. They took their position there.

Senator Frye. You did not see any marines paraded on Tuesday?

Mr. Reeder. Tuesday?

Senator Frye. Yes.

Mr. Reeder. They were there on the grounds.

Senator Frye. Did you see any marines paraded on Tuesday when the proclamation was read to take possession of the building?

Mr. Reeder. My memory is not clear on that point.

Senator Frye. Where did you see them?

Mr. Reeder. On the grounds; but I can not say that they paraded or not. They were right there on the grounds.

Senator Frye. What were they doing?

Mr. Reeder. I do not know whether I saw them paraded or not; but they were there.

The Chairman. That is the point in the case, whether you saw them paraded. I understood you to say that you did not witness the reading of the proclamation.

Mr. Reeder. I was not right there.

The Chairman. Where were you?

Mr. Reeder. I was not far away.

The Chairman. How far away?

Mr. Reeder. Right across the block-maybe two blocks.

The Chairman. Were you in full view of the audience-the crowd?

Mr. Reeder. Oh, yes.

The Chairman. At that particular time or before that time?

Mr. Reeder. Before what time?

The Chairman. Before the proclamation was read?

Senator Gray. On Tuesday?

The Chairman. At the time the proclamation establishing this Provisional

-p1049-

Government was read, did you see any United States marines drawn up in line, armed, etc?

Mr. Reeder. I do not know whether I saw them right in arms, but they were there. I could see them. I was up a square or two. I could see them there before the Government house.

Senator Frye. How do you mean you saw them? Were they in line? Or do you mean to say you saw some straggling soldiers?

Mr. Reeder. I do not know whether they were in line, drilling.

The Chairman. In line of battle, drawn up ready to fight?

Mr. Reeder. I could not tell that; I saw them there.

Senator Gray. Do you know where the troops were quartered, in Arion Hall, a building back of the Opera House?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

Senator Gray. Was it there you saw them?

Mr. Reeder. Yes; close in the vicinity of the Opera House.

Senator Gray. Were they not in the rear of Arion Hall, inside the fence?

Mr. Reeder. I saw them scattered all around the hall and near the opera house.

Senator Gray. Do you mean that the marines were out beside the Government building, where you could see them and anybody could see them?

Mr. Reeder. Yes; I saw them there. They were not in the grounds of the Government building.

Senator Gray. Quite a body of them?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

Senator Gray. Did they have arms?

Mr. Reeder. I could not tell exactly whether they had their arms. I was within a block or so of them.

The Chairman. Pretty large crowd at the time that proclamation was being read?

Mr. Reeder. No; there were only a few.

Senator Gray. Did you see the troops when they were landed on Monday afternoon?

Mr. Reeder. I did not see them during the time they were landing; no.

Senator Gray. You saw them march through the streets?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

Senator Gray. Did you have any previous information that they were to land?

Mr. Reeder. No; I had not anything.

Senator Gray. You said the first you knew of any troops from the Boston being ashore was seeing them on the streets, marching?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

Senator Gray. From what direction were they marching?

Mr. Reeder. They were marching up from where the Boston was landed, up through one of those streets.

Senator Gray. What was the public impression, so far as you were able to gather it? You were out there and in contact with the people, were you not?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

Senator Gray. What impression did you gather as to the object of those troops landing; what was the popular impression?

Mr. Reeder. I did not know and do not know anybody else who did know. I was just waiting developments there and seeing what I could see.

-p1050-

Senator Gray. What developments did you witness in that line as to the impression created by the presence of those troops-that they were there to support the Queen, or there to support the Provisional Government?

Mr. Reeder. I was just waiting to see what they would do, because I could not tell why they were there, and I did not know anybody who did know.

Senator Gray. And you did not gather any impression at all?

Mr. Reeder. Not that I know of.

Senator Gray. Have you any opinions, as a matter of fact, as to whether they had any influence upon the establishment of the Provisional Government, born from your observation there?

Senator Gray. What is it?

Mr. Reeder. I think that the Government-in those who were in power-it excited some fears that they were there for the purpose not to sustain the Government, but to help change it somehow or other.

Senator Gray. Not to sustain the existing Government?

Mr. Reeder. The Queen.

Senator Gray. Was that the impression that you gathered from your talk with the people?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

Senator Gray. From what you saw and heard?

Mr. Reeder.Yes.

Senator Gray. That they were there to aid the change in the Government? That is the way you put it?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

Senator Gray. Had you any interest, one way or the other?

Mr. Reeder. Not a bit of interest; not a cent's worth.

Senator Gray. You belonged to neither party?

Mr. Reeder. No.

Senator Gray. How long had you been on the islands?

Mr. Reeder. I had been there very close on to four months, and been among the people.

Senator Gray. Largely?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

Senator Gray. You had been an interested observer of what was going on-it was interesting to you?

Mr. Reeder. Yes.

Senator Gray. You were alert-your mind was alert, to take in what was going on around you?

Mr. Reeder. Yes; that was it.

Senator Gray. What were you there for? Were you on business or on pleasure?

Mr. Reeder. I was there just as a tourist.

Senator Gray. There for your health?

Mr. Reeder. That was part of my business there. I had something in my throat and I thought it would boil it out.

Senator Gray. Was any of your family there with you?

Mr. Reeder. No.

Senator Gray. May I ask you, if you will not consider it an impertinent question, what your politics are?

Mr. Reeder. I am a Republican. I never had a thought of politics while there. I was an American citizen. I had no allegiance to one party or the other. I determined that I would not imperil my safety. I had no interest whether the Queen's Government should survive or the missionary party should succeed. I intended to pursue such a

-p1051-

course as to have the protection of my Government in case the Government fell into the hands of either of those peoples. I knew if I joined a party and became interested in it and the party which I had joined was beaten, I would lose the protection of my Government.

Senator Gray. You did not want to join a party as a mere tourist there?

Mr. Reeder. No.

Senator Gray. You had no business in joining either party, had you?

Mr. Reeder. No.

Senator Gray. Did you have anything to do with the domestic affairs of those islands?

Mr. Reeder. No.

Adjourned until tomorrow, the 31st instant, at 10 o'clock a. m.


Washington, D. C., Wednesday, January 31,1894.

The subcommittee met pursuant to adjournment.

Present. The chairman (Senator Morgan) and Senators Butler, Gray, Frye, and Sherman, and Senator Davis, of the full committee.

SWORN STATEMENT OF CHARLES L. MACARTHUR.

The Chairman. State your residence.

Mr. MacArthur. Troy, New York.

Senator Frye. What is your business?

Mr. MacArthur. I am the editor of the Troy Budget.

Senator Frye. Were you at any time in the Hawaiian Islands?

Mr. MacArthur. Yes; the last of February, or early in March, 1893. I remained there about seven or eight weeks, I should say.

Senator Frye. What was your business there?

Mr. MacArthur. I went there to get rest, practically; but I found a state of things that very much interested me, and I investigated.

Senator Frye. You investigated the condition of affairs in the islands?

Mr. MacArthur. Yes. I presume you gentlemen have a paper from me. I wrote considerably. I wrote an article which was published pretty widely. I was there when Mr. Blount was there, and I saw him frequently. His wife and mine were acquainted and went about a good deal together.

The Chairman. That is your paper, the one with the map in it?

Mr. MacArthur. Yes. I could not cover as much ground as I wanted to because I found it of so much interest. I knew there was meat in it and I went right over it.

Senator Frye. Did you make a special business of investigating the condition of affairs in the islands?

Mr. MacArthur. Yes.

Senator Frye. And in the course of that investigation did you have communications with parties of both sides there, the royalists as well as the Provisional Government?

Mr. MacArthur. Yes. All the time I was there the Provisional Government was in power. I did not report the result of my investigations to Mr. Blount. I did on one affair. He mentioned here that


Previous Page Next Page