561-593

From TheMorganReport
(Redirected from 560-593)
Jump to: navigation, search
Previous Page Next Page

-p560-

a chance they would not have if Hawaii were annexed to the United States. The Chairman. You think a republic is quite possible.

Mr. Emerson. Yes. We want to eliminate politics out of that country, with such a polyglot people as we have.

Senator Gray. You do not have a republic there now?

Mr. Emerson. I presume we shall have a republic if you do not admit us.

The Chairman. You have been over the islands a good deal?

Mr. Emerson. I have been from end to end over the islands three times.

The Chairman. You know the face of the country?

Mr. Emerson. Yes.

The Chairman. What do you say as to the capacity of the Hawaiian Islands to maintain a population as great as they have now, upon their native productions?

Mr. Emerson. Do you mean white population?

The Chairman. The whole population. Will the islands sustain the population that you have there now on native productions?

Mr. Emerson. Certainly, five times as much.

The Chairman. It is a fertile country where it is arable?

Mr. Emerson. Yes. I believe it would sustain ten times as much.

Senator Gray. What is the population?

Mr. Emerson. It varies; Chinese and Japanese coming and going.

Senator Gray. I mean, about.

Mr. Emerson. Ninety thousand.

The Chairman. So that you think the islands could sustain a million of population?

Mr. Emerson. It would be better for that country if they cultivated coffee and the fruit industries, orange industries, instead of giving all up to sugar. We all feel that we want to have a variety of industries.

The Chairman. The cultivation that is going on in Hawaii is for export?

Mr. Emerson. Yes.

The Chairman. What you want is for domestic use?

Mr. Emerson. Yes, and for export. We want to have a larger variety of products for export.

Subscribed and sworn to.

O. P. Emerson.

The subcommittee adjourned to meet on Tuesday, January 2, 1894, at 10 o'clock a. m.

-p561-

SECOND DAY.

Washington, D. C, Tuesday, January 2, 1894.

The committee met pursuant to adjournment.

Present, the chairman (Senator Morgan) and Senators Gray and Frye.

Absent, Senators Butler and Sherman.

SWORN STATEMENT OF MR. PETER CUSHMAN JONES.

Senator Frye. Mr. Jones made a deposition in Honolulu, which deposition was sent to me. My idea is to read it to Mr. Jones and the committee, and if Mr. Jones make it a part of his testimony here it would save to the committee one or two hours of time.

The Chairman. There being no objection, that course can be taken.

Senator Gray. Is that deposition published in any of the documents that we have.

Senator Frye. No. It is a deposition that was given by Mr. Jones in Honolulu before he left there. It was given to be used in this investigation. It is as follows:

Hawaiian Islands,
Honolulu, Oahu, ss.:
P. C. Jones, being duly sworn, deposes and says that he was born in Boston, Mass., United States of America; that he came to Honolulu in the year 1857, and has resided here since that time; that he has large business interests here, and is at present engaged with his son in the business known as "The Hawaiian Safe Deposit and Investment Company;" that on the 8th day of November, A. D. 1892, he was commissioned by the then Queen Liliuokalani minister of finance, and retained that office until the 12th day of January, A. D. 1893, the cabinet to which he belonged being generally known as the Wilcox-Jones cabinet; that he is acquainted with James H. Blount and knows the time when that gentleman came to Honolulu as special commissioner; that soon after his arrival he called upon him and said in effect as follows: "As I was intimately acquainted with the Government during the last two months of the monarchy I may be able to give some information in regard to our affairs, and I shall be pleased to give my statement if you desire it"; that Mr. Blount thanked him, said he would be pleased to have it, and would let him know when he would be ready to grant him an interview; that a careful statement was prepared by this affiant on the 25th day of May, A. D. 1893, from which this affidavit is taken, reciting all the important events connected with the Government from the 8th day of November, A. D. 1892, up to the 16th day of March, A. D. 1893, that period including the events of January 17, of which this affiant was fully cognizant; that the said James H. Blount never asked for this interview and this affiant never had any opportunity of presenting the statement, although he is informed and believes that other persons suggested to Mr. Blount that he secure the statement.
Affiant further says that his knowledge of the revolution and the events immediately leading up thereto is as follows: When it was known about town that the Queen was to proclaim a constitution great

S. Doc. 231, pt 6------36

-p562-
excitement was created about the whole city, and all were ready to take measures to prevent it. This seemed to be the public feeling with men as they met and discussed the matter on the street corners. About 3 o'clock on Saturday afternoon, January 14, an informal meeting was held at the office of W. O. Smith, on Fort street, to consider the situation, and a committee of safety, consisting of thirteen men representing different trades and professions, was appointed. On Monday, January 16, the mass meeting was held at the armory at 2 o'clock. Mr. E. C. Macfarlane and others arranged for a similar meeting at the same hour at Palace Square, hoping to draw away the crowd from the other. I attended the meeting at the armory but took no active part. I observed the men present, and as I was chairman of the mass meeting held in 1887 I can say that not only was the audience larger at the January 10 meeting but seemed to be more determined and resolved. I was at home on Monday afternoon at 5 o'clock, when one of our residents rode into my yard and said that the troops from the U. S. S. Boston had just landed to protect life and property, and though there had been no outbreak yet there was great excitement in the city, and it was a great relief to me and my family to know that we had the protection of the only warship in port, as I anticipated trouble, and I believe the presence of sailors and marines on shore was all that prevented riot and possibly bloodshed.
On Tuesday morning, January 17, Mr. C. L. Carter called at my house before breakfast and informed me that after breakfast he would call upon me with Mr. Bolte, they having been appointed for that purpose, and invite me to take a place in the executive council of the Provisional Government which was to be formed that day. I was surprised to know that my name had been mentioned. I told Mr. Carter that I was not fitted for such a position, and that my experience for the last two months had made me heartily sick of politics; that it might look as if I was going in for revenge for having been put out of the last cabinet, and I could not see any reason why I should accept the position. I told him, however, that I would carefully consider the matter and give him an answer when he called later with Mr. Bolte. I placed the matter before my wife to get her opinion, and presented all the arguments I could think of against taking the position. Among other thing's, I said, "It is more than probable that the Queen's party will not submit without fighting, and the chances are that I will get shot." She said in reply, "If you do get shot I can give you up, for I feel it to be your duty to take part in this move. The country needs you at this time, and if you lose your life it will be in the discharge of your duty."
After breakfast Messrs. Carter and Bolte called and I agreed to accept the position of minister of finance provided Mr. S. B. Dole would consent to take the position of President. It was arranged that I should remain at my house and when needed would receive a telephone message and was to meet the others at the office of W. O. Smith. During the time between breakfast and noon I remained at home, feeling all the time that there was great danger to my life, and this feeling seemed to grow upon me during the day. On the way from W. O. Smith's office to the Government building I thought surely we would be shot down, for when the shot was fired just as we left Smith's office for the building it looked to us as if the shooting would be general. I had fears there also of an attack while the proclamation was being read, for it was reported that there was a force in the building under command of C. J. McCarthy, and I was not rid of these fears until I saw a sufficient number of our men in the building to afford us protection.
-p563-
I was wondering how others were, but my own thought was that we could not come out of it without loss of life, and my chances for getting shot were above the average on account of my relations with the Government only a few days before. I had no arms of any kind with me.
During the month I thought over the situation carefully and I was fully convinced that if ever it was necessary to take a decided stand for representative and responsible government it was at this time. While the Queen had professed to take back all she had said and done about a new constitution I felt it was only to gain time to make better preparations to carry out her designs, and while I fully realized the step we were taking was revolutionary I felt it was my duty as a man to do what I could to assist in putting down a form of government that was oppressive and corrupt, and I was conscious that I was doing my duty in accepting office under the Provisional Government. The telephone message came to me about 1 o'clock, and I went immediately to the appointed place. The proclamation was read and after we had all signed it we started for the Government building at 2:35 p. m. all in a body. Just as we came out of Smith's office a shot was fired up street near E. O. Hall & Sons' store and thus diverted the crowd, so when we arrived at the Government building there were only a few persons present. After the surrender of the building and the reading of the proclamation I at once took possession of the finance office which contained many of the Government records and the treasury vaults. It was a surprise to us to find that there was no force at the Government building to protect it when we arrived there.
As soon as we could, after getting possession of the building, the councils assembled and appointed Col. Soper the commander of the Provisional Government forces and attended to other matters that required prompt action. About 6 o'clock Capt. Wiltse, of the Boston, called upon us and said that we could not be recognized as a de facto Government until we had possession of the station house and barracks. We expected that resistance would be made at the station house, but soon after Wiltse's visit the deputy marshal called upon us with a request that we go to the station house and confer with the late cabinet. This we refused to do, but sent word back that if the old cabinet desired to meet us they could come to the building and would be guaranteed safe entrance and exit. Soon after two members came and had a conference, and later all four came and agreed to turn over the station house and barracks to the Provisional Government, which was done about 7 o'clock. It was a surprise to us to see how quickly and quietly they yielded, and it is an evidence of the rottenness of the monarchy which fell as soon as any resistance was made. And during the evening many of our best citizens who had taken no active part in this move called and gave their congratulations, assuring us of their support. Martial law was proclaimed and the city guarded by volunteers during the night. Many threats were made, and many rumors were in circulation every day that caused much anxiety and constant watching.
The strain was very great all these days, and so many threats were made we consulted with the advisory council and decided that to bring about a state of quiet we would ask the protection of the American minister, and suggested that the American flag be hoisted on the Government building, which he consented to do, and the flag was raised on the morning of February 1. The strain was at once removed, not only from the members of the council but of all good citizens of Honolulu, and in fact all over the islands. During my term of office there
-p564-
is one thing that impressed me very deeply and that was the unaniimity of feeling among the members of both the executive and advisory councils. I remained in office untill March 16, just two months, when I found that the strain was so great that I was fast breaking down under it, and I retired.
And further, with regard to the events and the causes which led up to the late revolution, this affiant says as follows: The causes which led to the late revolution in January last are of no recent origin, but date back to 1874 when Kalakaua secured the throne. Almost immediately after his accession to the throne he began to use his high position to gain more power, and this he continued to do until the revolution of 1887. The community was patient and long suffering and for years submitted to many annoyances before rising up and protecting its rights.
No King ever had better prospects for a peaceful and succesful reign than did Kalakaua, and if he had made a proper use of his rights and powers might have made his reign a prosperous one. He seemed to be wholly corrupt, and his influence was one which had its effect upon the mass of the native people. Not satisfied with the appointment of the House of Nobles, he interfered in the election of representatives by using liquor which was taken from the custom-house duty free and promising offices under his patronage. He dismissed more than one cabinet for nothing, and in some instances sent messages to their houses in the middle of the night asking for their resignations, while others whom he assured had his implicit confidence he discharged a few hours after. Kalakaua surrounded himself with men of bad character and gave himself up to habits unbecoming a King. He was always in debt and resorted to measures for raising money that were wholly dishonorable for any man, much more a King. The Legislature of 1890 paid up his debts and issued bonds to the amount of $95,000 to meet his obligations, pledging the income of the Crown lands at the rate of $20,000 a year to meet these bonds, but when his sister came to the throne she repudiated the pledge given by her brother, and now this debt has to be borne by the State, only $5,000 having been received on this account.
When he died the country had much hope for the better state of things from his sister Liliuokalani. When she ascended the throne most of the better class of our people associated with her and did all in our power to surround her with good influences, and many of our best women stood ready to help and encourage her in all good works; but it was soon evident that she was more ambitious for power than her brother, and she began to use means to place herself in power, and while she professed friendship for those good women she was scheming to get entire control of the Government. She evidently had not profited by the revolution of 1887 and thought herself to be sufficiently strong to get back that power taken from her brother in 1887. She was more cunning, more determined, and no coward as he had been. On my arrival at Honolulu in September, 1892, after a visit of a year in the United States, I found that the Widemann cabinet had been removed by a vote of want of confidence, and in more than a week no new cabinet had been made up that would be satisfactory to the Queen and Legislature.
The Queen, however, did finally appoint E. C. Macfarlane, Paul Neumann, S. Parker, and C. T. Gulick, and as two of those were members of the late Widemann cabinet and Macfarlane had betrayed the members of the Legislature, this cabinet was soon voted out, when the Queen, still persisting in having her own way, appointed a new cabinet with
-p565-
W. H. Cornwell at its head. This cabinet was turned but a few hours after it presented itself before the Legislature, and it became evident to the Queen that she must comply with the desires of the majority of the Legislature. A committee was appointed by the house to advise the Queen that they would support a cabinet made up by either one of three men who were named to her. After waiting for a week or more she sent for G. N. Wilcox, one of the three men mentioned, and asked him to form a ministry. He selected Mr. Cecil Brown, Mr. Mark Robinson, and myself as his colleagues, and the Queen expressed herself as being fully satisfied with his choice. I hesitated to accept the position, but I was urged to take the position by many of our citizens and by men who were opposed to me in politics, among them Mr. Widemann, who came to me to prevail upon me, saying I had made my money here and it was my duty to serve the country at this time.
The Queen sent for me on the evening of November 6 and asked me to take the position of minister of finance with Wilcox as premier, and as all of the gentlemen were men in whom I had special confidence I accepted. And it was understood that we should meet at the palace on the morning of the 7th to take the oath of office and receive our commissions. The Queen wanted to have her way here and appoint Mr. Brown as premier, but this we refused, as it was contrary to the decision of a majority of the Legislature, and we sent her word that Mr. Wilcox must be premier or we would decline to serve. This message was sent on the morning of the 7th, when we had assembled at Mr. Brown's office for the purpose of going to the palace. We soon received a message from the Queen by the chamberlain that she was not ready for us, and we learned that she had hopes of sending Mr. Parker back again and so delayed the matter. Mr. Brown and myself at first were inclined to send back word to the Queen that we declined to accept the positions, but at the earnest solicitation of many friends we withdrew our objections and concluded to accept if she would send for us. Supposing that she could not carry her point and appoint Mr. Parker, the Queen sent for us at noon, November 8, and gave us our commissions.
We went to the Legislature which had assembled to receive us and assumed at once the duties of our respective offices. We had frequent interviews with the Queen and assured her that it was our desire to confer fully with her upon all important matters and that we would do all in our power to make matters pleasant and agreeable for her. Soon after we had taken up our duties we prepared a paper setting forth our policy which we presented to the Legislature. Before doing this, however, we submitted and fully explained it to the Queen and had her assurance that it met her hearty approval and that we should have her support in carrying it out. The document contained the following points of policy:
(1) To promote closer relations with the United States to the end that the products of the Kingdom may be remunerative to those engaged in their cultivation and production.
(2) To assist in the passage of such laws as will relieve the present want of labor.
(3) To carry on all branches of the Government economically.
(4) To oppose any measure tending to legalize a lottery or license gambling.
(5) To oppose any measure that will interfere with or change the present monetary system of the Kingdom.
(6) To remove all employes of the Government who are incapable or not trustworthy.
-p566-
Early in December we presented to the Queen the nominations of W. A. Whiting and W. F. Frear as circuit judges under the new law that was to go into operation January 1, 1893. In this law the Queen appointed, by and with the advice and consent of the cabinet. We decided upon those gentlemen after conferring with the supreme court and a large number of the members of the bar. We heard nothing from the Queen for several days and finally waited upon her to sign the commissions. She informed us that it was her desire to appoint Antone Rosa, as she had received a petition from several natives in his favor. We told her we could not approve of a man of his habits, and after discussing the matter at length she said, "As there are four of you against one I will yield and will appoint Mr. Frear." We waited several days without hearing from her, when we wrote her a letter calling her attention to the fact that we had not received the commissions and reminded her of her promise to send them. Mr. Paul Neumann told several persons she showed him our letter and was angry about it. She told him she did not want to sign Frear's commission. He said that he replied to her, "Your Majesty, as a woman you have the right to change your mind, but as a Queen never." We learned that she frequently consulted with Messrs. Neumann, Ashford, and others outside of her cabinet.
On December 31, the very last day, she sent to us the commission of Mr. Whiting duly signed, but sent no word about Mr. Frear. We discussed the matter, and it was decided that I should go and see the Queen and tell her that unless she could see her way clear to sign Frear's commission we would decline to accept Whiting. I met her and delivered the message, telling her also that the cabinet was responsible to the country while she was not and while we held our portfolios we should endeavor to give her good advice. She was not pleased, but yielded very gracefully and signed Frear's commission, delivering the same to me at that time. It was very evident from the first that she was not in sympathy with us, although she was always pleasant and ladylike in all her interviews, and yet she annoyed us by delaying matters, keeping back bills that had passed the house, conferring more with others than with her cabinet. We felt satisfied that she was using her influence against us with the native members of the Legislature and this became more apparent from day to day. We had hardly been in office a week before we heard that a vote of want of confidence was to be brought up against us, and this was threatened every day.
Native members were constantly coming to us informing us of the state of things with the hope of obtaining money from us. Kanealii, representative from Maui, came to my house on two occasions and informed me that 22 votes had been secured against us and intimated that if I would buy the other three, of which he was one, the vote could be defeated. I refused to contribute one dollar for any such purpose and told him if he or his friends wanted money they had better vote against us. On January 4 Mr. Bush, representative from Oahu, brought in the long-expected resolution of want of confidence, but only 19 votes were secured and it failed to carry. After this it was hardly expected that they could secure a sufficient number of votes to remove us, although they kept constantly at it night and day. The Queen interested herself and labored earnestly among the native members to secure their votes, going down on her knees to Hoapili, noble from Hawaii, so, he said, to get him to vote us out. On the afternoon of January 11 the final passage of the infamous lottery bill came up and was carried by a vote of 23 to 20. It is a singular fact that the 23 who
-p566-
voted for this bill all voted against us the next day, which together with the votes of C. O. Berger and Cornwall put us out of office. It is a fact that the Queen signed the lottery bill, although she pledged herself to support us in opposing it.
At noon on January 12 the Queen gave a luau, native feast, and after recess in the afternoon another want of confidence resolution was brought in by Kapahu, representative from Hawaii, who was decked out in a yellow wreath of flowers. It was seconded by Kanoa, Noble from Kauai, who also wore the same kind of a wreath, and they were the only members who had such wreaths which were said to have been placed on them by the Queen. Representatives Kapahu, Pua, and Kanealii all voted for us on the 4th of January, but on this last vote they all went against us. On the morning of the 12th instant the Queen sent for C. O. Berger, who had not been in the Legislature for several days, and had declared that he would not go there again, and urged him to vote against us, promising him that Mr. Widemann, his father-in-law, should make up the new cabinet. He agreed to this and his vote gave her the necessary number, 25. Only three foreign members of the House voted against us, Messrs. Cornwell, Petersen, and Berger. Representative Kanealii afterwards admitted to Mr. Robinson, one of the cabinet, that he got $500 for his vote against us. We could have prevented this vote by the use of money, but we declined to resort to any such measure to retain our seats. We felt all the time we were in office we were between the devil and the deep sea, the Queen and the Legislature, and it was a great relief to us all when the result of the vote was announced.
My experience in office was a revelation. I saw that good bills could be defeated and bad bills passed by the use of money, and I have been led to the conclusion by my experience in the Legislature that the native Hawaiians are not capable of self-government. I feel quite satisfied that the Queen and her party did not expect on the 11th of January to secure sufficient votes to remove us from office, for on the evening of that day Mr. Henry Waterhouse called at my house and revealed a plot that had been planned and would have been executed if they had failed to carry the vote of want of confidence. I was informed that an anonymous letter, written by John F. Colburn, had been sent to me asking the cabinet to resign because the Queen hated us all. If we did not resign on receipt of his letter the plan was for the Queen to invite the cabinet to the palace as soon as the Legislature was prorogued and demand our resignations. If we declined to resign, as we certainly should have done, she was to place us under arrest in the palace and then proclaim a new constitution. This I reported to my colleagues the next morning, but at that time they could not credit the report. The anonymous letter came through the post-office, but did not reach me until the following Monday, January 16. The following is a copy of the letter:
January 11,1893.
Mr. P. C. Jones:
"It seems inconsistent with your principle to stay in office when you were kept there by open bribery on the part of certain Germans on Queen street. Money kept you in office, otherwise you would have been voted out; your colleague, Robinson, paid Akani and Aki $25 a piece before the voting, some days; he calls it a New Year's present; can you stomach that? We got the proof Bolte packed money in envelopes just before the vote came off and took it with him to the Government
-p568-
building. George Markham had a hand in giving it to the nobles, Pua and Hoopili, Representatives Kanealii and Kapahu. Can't you see these things; ain't you wide awake enough for it; can you teach the Sunday school class and feel that you are acting consistent? Baldwin makes open brags that they propose to keep you in office if it takes coin to do it. Can you stand that? I think when you read this and "attempt" to make inquiries you will find this to be true, and I know you are too honorable to stay in office with this cloud hanging over your official head. You better resign before it is made public. Peterson has all the facts and he proposes to shove things if you and your colleagues don't get out of office which you are holding by unfair means. That is bribery. If you don't get out of office and a new constitution is shoved on this country by the Queen you four men and your hypocritical supporters will be to blame for it, resorting to bribery to keep you in office. The Queen hates all four of you and you had better retire.
"My name is not necessary."
This letter was taken from the post-office by my son on Monday the 16th of January. He recognized the handwriting of John Colburn on the envelope, being familiar with it, as he had been in the employ of Lewers & Cooke for several years with Colburn. The letter itself was written by Miss Parmenter, a niece of Colburn's, and if it had come on the morning of the 12th, as I fully expected it would, my colleagues would have credited the rest of the story. Mr. Colburn denied all knowledge of a new constitution until Saturday, January 14, when he says it was sprung upon the cabinet, but his letter to me dated the llth clearly shows that he was aware of it. It is possible to get positive proof that this letter was dictated by Colburn, copied by his niece, and sent in an envelope addressed by him after he himself had written below "My name is not necessary."
On Friday, January 13, the new cabinet was announced, consisting of S. Parker, W. H. Cornwell, J. F. Colburn, and A. P. Peterson. The lottery and opium bills were both signed by the Queen and reported back to the Legislature on the same day, which was the last one of the session. On Saturday morning, about 9 o'clock, Mr. C. O. Berger went to several members of the reform party and was anxious to join with them and vote out the new cabinet, but this they declined to do. Mr. Berger had been disappointed, for the Queen had not kept her promise to him that his father-in-law should make the new cabinet, although she had invited Mr. Widemann to take the position of minister of finance with Parker, Peterson and Colburn. This he had declined to do, so Cornwell was substituted for him. It is rather remarkable that on Saturday Mr. Colburn should have gone to Judge Hartwell and Mr. Thurston and engaged their services to prevent the Queen from proclaiming the new constitution. When he saw the state of the people he became afraid and tried to retrace his steps, but it was too late.
There was never to my knowledge any belief or anticipation that the troops of the Boston would be landed for the purpose or would in anyway assist in the abrogation of the monarchy or the formation of the Provisional Government.
Peter C. Jones.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 5th day of December, A. D. 1893.

[SEAL.] Alfred W. Carter,
Notary Public.

-p569-

AFFIDAVIT OF CHARLES M. COOKE.

Hawaiian Islands,
Honolulu, Oahu, ss:
C. M. Cooke, being duly sworn, deposes and says that he is one of the firm of Lewers & Cooke; that John F. Colburn was in the employ of the said firm for many years; that he is familiar with the handwriting of the said John F. Colburn; that the words "My name is not necessary" at the close of an anonymous letter addressed to Mr. P. C. Jones, dated January 11, 1893, are in the handwriting of the said John F. Colburn.
Chas. M. Cooke.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 5th day of December, A. D. 1893.

[SEAL.] Alfred W. Carter,
Notary Public.

AFFIDAVIT OF E. A. JONES.

Hawaiian Islands,
Honolulu, Oahu, ss:
E. A. Jones, being duly sworn, deposes and says that on the 16th day of January, A. D. 1893, he took from the post-office an envelope addressed to his father, P. C. Jones, which contained an anonymous letter, dated January 11, 1893, signed, "My name is not necessary." That he has known John F. Colburn for many years, and was associated with him in business for many years; and that the handwriting by which the said envelope was addressed was that of John F. Colburn, as well as the words, "My name is not necessary" at the close of the said letter.
E.A. Jones

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 5th day of December, A. D. 1893.

[SEAL.] Alfred W. Carter,
Notary Public.

The Chairman. Did you save that anonymous letter ?

Mr. Jones. Yes. I have it with me. If you desire I will turn it over to you.

The Chairman. Have you a knowledge of the handwriting?

Mr. Jones. No. But my son and Mr. Cook, who are familiar with it, declare that they have. There is the original letter. [Producing paper.] Here is the second page of it. Perhaps I had better leave that. You can see where it says, "Name is not necessary," and it is in a different handwriting.

The Chairman. There is a memorandum that you have appended to this letter, it appears.

Mr. Jones. Omit that. I have recited that in my testimony. I just made a note of the time I received it.

Senator Gray. That is for your own information ?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. At what time was the bill signed relating to the distillation of spiritous liquors, which bill is mentioned there?

Mr. Jones. That bill was signed some days before that, I think.

-p570-

The Chairman. Signed by the cabinet of which you were a member?

Mr. Jones. I think that was. That had passed the House and was signed by the Queen, and was also approved by Minister Wilcox. That is my impression. You refer to the distillation of spirituous liquors?

The Chairman. Yes.

Mr. Jones. Yes, there was a bill of that nature passed; and I think that was approved by the cabinet. Of course, it had passed the House, and we were bound to recognize it.

The Chairman. That was a bill amending a statute that had been on the statute books for several years ?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. Was that the distillation bill, so-called?

Mr. Jones. Yes; there was a distillation bill passed.

Senator Gray. It is the bill to which Mr. Emerson, the last witness, referred?

Senator Frye. Yes.

Senator Gray. And that was the bill that came to you in the regular course, and was approved by your cabinet?

Mr. Jones. Yes. I am not very positive about that; but that was a bill in the interest of commerce. We did not oppose anything that passed the House; anything that passed the House we had to accept.

Senator Gray. That was a bill that regulated the liquor traffic?

Mr. Jones. Yes; it was to encourage home manufacture. It was a bill that I took very little interest in.

The Chairman. I have a copy of the bill here. I wanted to ask Mr. Jones whether under the constitution of 1887 it was requisite, in order that an act of the Legislature should become a law, that it be signed by the Queen and one of her cabinet.

Mr. Jones. Yes; it was not valid until signed by one of the cabinet. The minister of the interior had to approve all bills; otherwise they were not valid.

The Chairman [exhibiting blue print heretofore used in the examination]. Look at that blue print and state whether you are familiar with it.

Mr. Jones. Yes; I am familiar with it—very familiar.

The Chairman. Is it a correct plat of the city of Honolulu and the buildings mentioned there?

Mr. Jones. Yes; and it is very accurate.

Senator Gray. I would like to premise the two or three questions that I desire to ask Mr. Jones with the statement that I have no criticism at all to make upon the desire that he and other good people of Honolulu evince for a change of Government in Hawaii; in fact, so far as I understand his statements, I am inclined to sympathize with the desire. I beg him to believe that I only wish to get at the facts and not his reasons for a desire to change the Government—the facts that relate to our attitude in the matter.

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. I am going to ask you in regard to this native population about which I, for one, have very little information. The subject is quite interesting to me. You have been in Hawaii how many years?

Mr. Jones. I have been there thirty-six years, and, outside of my business I have had a great deal to do with the natives. I have taken a great deal of interest in them.

Senator Gray. For that reason, what you say about them would be

-p571-

very interesting. In the first place, are they a people of fair intelligence?

Mr. Jones. Fair intelligence?

Senator Gray. Yes.

Mr. Jones. Yes; they are. And many of them are excellent mathematicians; they seem to take hold of mathematics.

Senator Gray. Are any of them teachers?

Mr. Jones. They are educating them in that direction. The Kamehameha schools, founded by Mrs. Bishop—she was the last of the Kamehameha family—are very liberally subsidized by her husband, who is now living. They are preparing a good many young men for teachers, and they are doing very well. There are two young men in New York now receiving higher education at some normal school— getting instruction to become teachers.

Senator Gray. I did not know that they were so far advanced as that. How long has education been general among the native population?

Mr. Jones. Oh, ever since their language was reduced to a written language by the early missionaries. I think it is almost impossible to find a Hawaiian who is not able at least to read and write. They have what we would call in this country a common-school education. They were educated in the Hawaiian language, and are now being taught very largely in the English language, it being their preference.

Senator Gray. Then, there has been quite a generation, as things go, who have been under the influence of the common-school education?

Mr. Jones. Oh, yes; more than a generation.

Senator Gray. Do they take much interest in the politics of the islands?

Mr. Jones. Yes; they do. They have taken a good deal of interest in politics, and they are very easily influenced for good or for evil.

Senator Gray. Are they an amiable people, generally?

Mr. Jones. Very amiable; yes.

Senator Gray. Are they treacherous; have they the characteristics of our North American Indians?

Mr. Jones. No; but they are untruthful—not what we would call treacherous; I would hardly call them treacherous; but sometimes they are untruthful.

Senator Gray. Have any large number of them accepted the Christian religion?

Mr. Jones. Yes; there are some of them very exemplary Christian men and women.

Senator Gray. How is it among the masses—are most of them educated in the ordinary tenets of Christianity?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. As are the ordinary masses of the population in some of our States?

Mr. Jones. I would say that they would compare very favorably with the early Christians of Corinth, and those to whom Paul gave his instructions. I do not wish to convey the idea that the Hawaiians are a treacherous people by any means; but they do not hesitate to tell little taradiddles to cover up.

Senator Gray. That is the propensity of all inferior races?

Mr. Jones. The Hawaiians are called a good-natured people.

Senator Frye. Are they capable of self-government?

Mr. Jones. I should say not; although I should be willing to give

-p572-

the same privileges to them that I would ask for myself in the way of voting.

Senator Gray. What day did you go out of office?

Mr. Jones. I went out on the 12th of January.

Senator Gray. That was Wednesday?

Mr. Jones. That was Thursday.

The Chairman. Allow me to inquire right there, what was the form of the vote by which you were removed from office?

Mr. Jones. Mr. Kapahu, as I have said there, was the introducer of the resolution, the one who proposed that a vote of want of confidence be brought against the ministry.

The Chairman. In that form?

Mr. Jones. Yes; and he then went on to laud Mr. Wilcox, Mr. Robinson, and myself, and tell what good men we were—but brought in this vote of want of confidence. That was seconded by Kanoa. There was no discussion on it. There was a motion made to indefinitely postpone that motion. That was lost. Then it went back to the original motion, and the motion for want of confidence was carried by 25 votes.

The Chairman. Against how many?

Mr. Jones. I think there were 45 members of the house. That matter had been settled by the supreme court only a little while before. There are 24 representatives and 24 nobles. They all sit together in one house and vote together. There had been one or two vacancies, and the matter was submitted to the supreme court. The question was, how many votes constituted a majority of the vote of want of confidence. The court decided that a majority of the whole house—48 members and the 4 ministers. In that vote the 4 ministers could not vote, and that leaves 48 votes; and there must be 25 votes.

The Chairman. I want to get at whether that vote of want of confidence had any relation to any particular measure.

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. It was a sweeping vote of want of confidence?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. You say this was Thursday?

Mr. Jones. The 12th of January.

Senator Gray. That you went out of office?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. And you had no public function to perform, no public duty again, until you became a member of the committee of safety ?

Mr. Jones. Minister of the executive council of the Provisional Government.

Senator Gray. Were you not a member of the committee of safety?

Mr. Jones. No, I was not.

The Chairman. The committee of safety was the advisory council.

Mr. Jones. Many of them afterward became members of the advisory council.

The Chairman. The advisory council is still a separate body from the committee of safety?

Mr. Jones. The committee of safety ceased to exist on the formation of the Government.

Senator Gray. You say you received a telephone message about 1 o'clock to go to some place, an appointed place. What day was that?

Mr. Jones. That was on Tuesday, the 17th.

Senator Gray. About 1 o'clock in the day?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

-p573-

Senator Gray. Where did you go then; where was the appointed place?

Mr. Jones. The appointed place was the office of W. O. Smith, where the committee of safety and those who had agreed to take part in the new Government assembled before going to the Government House.

Senator Gray. Whom did you find there?

Mr. Jones. I found all the members of the committee of safety, and Judge Dole, Capt. King, and W. O. Smith.

Senator Gray. Those with you constituted afterwards the executive council?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. Who else were there?

Mr. Jones. I do not remember any others. I think no others were there.

Senator Gray. After you got there, what did you do?

Mr. Jones. We read over the proclamation.

Senator Gray. It had been prepared before you got there?

Mr. Jones. It had been prepared; yes, and signed. We all signed it, and then went to the Government House.

Senator Gray. Whom did you walk with; do you recollect?

Mr. Jones. I could not tell you now. It was a very exciting time, you know.

Senator Gray. Did the whole thirteen or fourteen march up in a body?

Mr. Jones. No; part of us went one street and part another. I can show you by the map.

Senator Gray. Show me where you met in Mr. Smith's office.

Mr. Jones. Smith's office is right in there. [Indicating on diagram.]

Senator Gray. Which street?

Mr. Jones. Fort street.

Senator Gray. Near what?

Mr. Jones. Near Merchant—very near Merchant street. The Government building is there [indicating]. Some of us went up Merchant street and came in here [indicating]; some went up Queen street and went into the Government building. I went by the way of Merchant street. I think I walked with Judge Dole.

Senator Gray. How many were with you and Judge Dole—immediately with you, right together?

Mr. Jones. But we were perhaps half the number. I could not say now. You see it was a very exciting time, and this shot had been fired right up by Hall's corner, on Fort street—just above us.

Senator Gray. What sort of shot was it?

Mr. Jones. It was a pistol shot. Here [indicating] is Hall's corner. We were here [indicating], and this shot was fired right here [indicating]. Senator Gray. Were there any crowds on Merchant street?

Mr. Jones. No.

Senator Gray. This shot drew the people over toward the place of shooting. That was after you had started, or before?

Mr. Jones. Just as we started. Just as we came out I saw the flash of the pistol.

Senator Gray. Was there any crowd around Mr. Smith's office when you came out?

Mr. Jones. No.

Senator Gray. Was there any up Queen street? Did you see up Queen street?

-p574-

Mr. Jones. No; Queen street is below Merchant street.

Senator Frye. Were any of you armed?

Mr. Jones. I was not. I think some of them had arms.

Senator Gray. Did you see any arms where you went that day?

Mr. Jones. In the Government building ?

Senator Gray. No; Mr. Smith's office.

Mr. Jones. No.

Senator Gray. You say that you went to the Government building. Did you and Mr. Dole arrive first? Did you find anybody at the Government building?

Mr. Jones. I think there were eight persons in the Government building when we got there. None of the ministers were there.

Senator Gray. What did you do when you got in?

Mr. Jones. Mr. Cooper immediately read the proclamation.

Senator Gray. Immediately?

Mr. Jones. Within two or three minutes of our assembling.

Senator Gray. Who was Mr. Cooper—one of the committee?

Mr. Jones. Mr. Cooper was one of the committee, and also one of the advisory council. He read the proclamation.

Senator Gray. His name is what?

Mr. Jones. H. E. Cooper.

Senator Gray. One of the committee of safety, you mean?

Mr. Jones. One of the committee of safety, and afterward he was one of the advisory council.

Senator Gray. Those who went up there, then—Mr. Dole, Mr. King, Mr. Smith, and yourself—were afterward the executive council and members of the committee?

Mr. Jones. And the advisory council, yes.

Senator Gray. How long did. it take to complete the reading of the proclamation?

Mr. Jones. I should say it took just about ten minutes, and in that time our forces, our men, were coming in from the armory. We were ahead of time.

Senator Gray. Was anybody there when the reading commenced outside? Let me ask, first, where was the proclamation read from?

Mr. Jones. From the steps of the Government building.

Senator Gray. What street?

Mr. Jones. Facing the palace or Palace Square. Here [indicating] is Palace Square, and it was read from that part [indicating].

Senator Gray. Facing the palace?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. Who were in front of the steps when they commenced to read the proclamation—how many?

Mr. Jones. Very few. I do not think there were more than a half dozen persons.

Senator Gray. You spoke of "our men" coming up. How many had come up?

Mr. Jones. I should say there were fifty or sixty when we got through reading the proclamation.

Senator Gray. Were they organized as a military organization?

Mr. Jones. As they marched down the street there was very little time for organization.

Senator Gray. Were they in fact organized?

Mr. Jones. They marched down in squads.

Senator Frye. Armed?

-p575-

Mr. Jones. They had rifles; yes.

The Chairman. Under the command of officers?

Mr. Jones. Under the command of their different captains.

Senator Gray. How long after the close of the reading of the proclamation was it that they arrived?

Mr. Jones. Some of them arrived before the reading of the proclamation was finished.

Senator Gray. How many do you suppose?

Mr. Jones. Well, I should say 40 or 50.

Senator Gray. Before the reading had been finished?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. And the balance were a little while afterwards?

Mr. Jones. Yes; they kept coming in.

Senator Gray. How many men in that organization, such as it was, were armed with rifles, and were there at the close or directly after the close of the reading of the proclamation?

Mr. Jones. Oh, a short time after, a half hour after, there must have been 150 or 200,1 should say.

Senator Frye. Armed?

Mr. Jones. Yes; all the men were armed at that time.

The Chairman. How did the information get out in the community that the proclamation was to be read there at that time?

Mr. Jones. It was spread abroad by the people all over the town Of course there was a good deal of excitement in the city that day, and people knew that something was going to be done in the way of dethroning the Queen, and they were watching for things; and this shot having been fired just as we started out, diverted a great many of the crowd up there to see what that was. It was very soon noised abroad, and the people came up.

Senator Gray. At the meeting the day before, at the Rifles' armory, of which you spoke, and which you attended, I believe?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. The resolutions which were read there, and which we have, did not proclaim this intention of dethroning the Queen?

Mr. Jones. They did not in so many words, but everybody understood what they meant.

Senator Gray. You say the resolutions did not proclaim that intention?

Mr. Jones. No.

Senator Gray. If you know accurately, state it; if you can not be accurate, give your best judgment. At what time was the reading of the proclamation through—what hour in the day?

Mr. Jones. It was a quarter of 3. It was a peculiar thing. When I went into the finance office, just as the reading of the proclamation was finished, the clock had stopped at a quarter to 3.

Senator Gray. Had it stopped just as you went in?

Mr. Jones. It was stopped just at that time.

Senator Gray. It was not stopped just as you went in?

Mr. Jones. No—it had not been stopped more than a minute or two.

Senator Gray. How did you kuow that?

Mr. Jones. The clock had been going before that.

Senator Gray. But getting at the hour—I want to call your attention to it. It would not be much of a guide to look at a clock that had stopped, unless you saw it stop.

Mr. Jones. I know it from looking at my watch. We arrived there

-p576-

about twenty minutes of 3, and it took about ten minutes to read the proclamation.

Senator Gray. The clock stopped about a quarter of 3?

Mr. Jones. Yes; we did not intend to be there until 3, o'clock.

Senator Gray. After the proclamation had been read you went into the finance room. Who went with you?

Mr. Jones. I think I went in there to notify the register of accounts that I had taken a position as a member of the Provisional Government.

Senator Gray. YOU were one of the Provisional Government.

Mr. Jones. Yes; he recognized me.

Senator Gray. What did the Executive Council do? I suppose you got together as a body, you four men?

Mr. Jones. Yes; with the Advisory Council, got together and we appointed first Col. Soper as commander of the forces, and then proclaimed martial law. Then some attended to different things. Mr. Dole notified his clerk to prepare notices to the various consuls and diplomatic corps that we had taken possession of the Government, and were in possession of the Government House and archives.

Senator Gray. Do you recollect what time it was that notice was sent to Mr. Stevens?

Mr. Jones. I think it must have been about 4 o'clock.

Senator Gray. When did you get an answer from him?

Mr. Jones. I do not remember; it was very soon.

Senator Gray. Before dark?

Mr. Jones. I think it was just about dark.

Senator Gray. Now, you say, that it was about 6 o'clock that the captain of the Boston called upon you. When was that? You say in your deposition that "Capt. Wiltse called upon us and said that we could not be recognized as a de facto government until we had possession of the station house and barracks." When was that?

Mr. Jones. This same afternoon.

Senator Gray. After the proclamation had been read?

Mr. Jones. After the proclamation had been read, and I think it was before we heard from Mr. Stevens. Of course, it was a day of very great excitement, and the hours were not very firmly fixed in our minds.

Senator Gray. When did you get possession of the station house and barracks?

Mr. Jones. I should say about half-past 7—7 or half-past.

Senator Frye That same day?

Mr. Jones. That same evening; yes.

Senator Gray. Did you go to the station house?

Mr. Jones. We sent a squad down there and they delivered it over.

Senator Gray. Had you previously sent representatives to the Queen?

Mr. Jones. As I said a minute ago, the ministers sent for us to come to the station house. We refused to go, and assured them if they would come up and interview us we would talk over the situation.

Senator Gray. When was this?

Mr. Jones. This was a very few minutes after Capt. Wiltse had been in.

Senator Gray. Did the ministers come up?

Mr. Jones. They came up. First Mr. Cornwell and Colburn came. They went back and reported to their colleagues, and Peterson and Parker came up with them the second time. It was then that they agreed to turn everything over to us.

-p577-

Senator Gray. Was it then that the Queen abdicated—signed her abdication?

Mr. Jones. No. Mr. Parker said he did not want to have any bloodshed, and they were quite ready to deliver over everything to us. Then we sent down to the station house, and Mr. Wilson, the marshal, insisted on having an order from the Queen.

Senator Gray. How far away was the station house?

Mr. Jones. It was about five minutes walk from the Government building.

Senator Frye The station house is nothing but the police headquarters?

Mr. Jones. That is all—police headquarters.

Senator Gray. Where are the barracks?

Mr. Jones. There [indicating on the diagram] is the station house and there [indicating] is the government house, and that is about five minutes walk.

Senator Gray. Where are the barracks?

Mr. Jones. The barracks are over here [indicating].

Senator Gray. Did you have any communication from the barracks?

Mr. Jones. Not until later.

Senator Gray. How late was it that you had communication from the barracks ?

Mr. Jones. I think about 9 o'clock Capt. Nowlein---

Senator Gray. Was it as late as 9?

Mr. Jones. I think not; I think it was about 8 o'clock that he was there. It may have been a little later.

Senator Gray. Was that after you heard from the Queen—heard of her abdication?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. Her abdication?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. When was that abdication secured? I do not suppose she came into your presence and made known her abdication.

Mr. Jones. Oh, no.

Senator Gray. It was brought by her ministers?

Mr. Jones. She agreed to surrender, and she did it by being allowed to make a protest. She made a protest.

Senator Gray. About what time did you get that abdication and protest?

Mr. Jones. I should say that was a little before 8 o'clock, as I remember.

Senator Gray. And it was after 8 and toward 9 o'clock that you had the surrender of the barracks from Capt. Nowlein?

Mr. Jones. Very soon after. I do not remember; there were so many events that followed so closely upon one another.

Senator Gray. You said first 9 o'clock and then about 8.

Mr. Jones. I do not think 9 o'clock; nothing as late as 9.

Senator Gray. First you said 9 and then you said 8 was the time that the surrender of the barracks occurred. The Queen's abdication you said was about 8 o'clock, as you say now.

Mr. Jones. I think so.

Senator Gray. Do you recollect when you got your answer from Mr. Stevens?

Mr. Jones. I do not.

Senator Gray. Do you recollect getting it all?

Mr. Jones. Oh, yes.

S. Doc. 231, pt 6----37

-p578-

Senator Gray. Was it dark when you got it?

Mr Jones Yes, as I remember, it was dark.

Senator Gray. Were you all together when this officer came with these gentlemen who composed the Royal Government?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. I wish you would try to recollect, if you can—if you can not of course you will say so—the coming in of that officer from Mr. Stevens; I mean, as to the time.

Mr. Jones. I would not attempt to do that, because I really do not remember.

Senator Gray. Of course, if you do not remember you would not attempt to say. This was on the 17th of January, Tuesday?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. You say, "Many threats were made and many rumors were in circulation every day that caused much anxiety and constant watching. The strain was very great all these days, and so many threats were made we consulted with the advisory council and decided that to bring about a state of quiet we would ask the protection of the American minister, and suggested that the American flag be hoisted on the Government building, which we consented to do, and the flag was raised on the morning of February 1st." Now, when was it that you first consulted in regard to that request to have the American flag raised?

Mr. Jones. I think it was the last day of January, as I remember. We went up to see Mr. Stevens, up to his house, and to the executive council.

Senator Gray. How long before that had you talked it among yourselves?

Mr. Jones. Perhaps for a day or so.

Senator Gray. Who first told you that the troops had been landed from the Boston?

Mr. Jones. One of our German residents told us.

Senator Gray. What did he tell you?

Mr. Jones. He told us that they were landed to preserve life and property.

Senator Gray. That was the language he used, or was it your understanding?

Mr. Jones. No, I think that was his language—the request of the committee, and he probably repeated what he had heard down town.

Senator Gray. I only want your recollection. Do you recollect who it was that so informed you?

Mr. Jones. Yes. I can not call his name. Let me see. I know he is a clerk in F. A. Schaeffer & Co's. I can not call his name just now.

Senator Gray. You say you do not think those native Hawaiians are capable of self-government?

Mr. Jones. I do not think so.

Senator Gray. Do you think they necessarily have to be governed by a more intelligent class for their own as well as for your benefit?

Mr. Jones. I think so.

Senator Gray. You think that the intelligent and those having property interests will have to control the country for the good of those islands?

Mr. Jones. It seems to me so. That is my opinion, although I would give them the same rights that I ask for myself.

Senator Gray. But that is your opinion of what the best interests of the islands require?

-p579-

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. Is that the general opinion of those who are associated with you?

Mr. Jones. I think so. Mr. Lance is that gentleman's name. I should be very sorry to live there under native rule entirely, where we pay all the taxes.

Senator Gray. You went out of office on the 12th?

Mr. Jones. Twelfth of January; from the Queen's cabinet.

Senator Gray. Was there a new cabinet formed immediately?

Mr. Jones. Oh, yes.

Senator Gray. Who composed it?

Mr. Jones. Cornwell, Peterson, Parker, and Colburn.

The Chairman. Let me ask you just there. Under the constitution of Hawaii is it necessary before the new cabinet take office that it should be confirmed by the Legislature?

Mr. Jones. No. The Queen appoints, but the Legislature can vote them out. The Queen cannot discharge the new cabinet. What is known as the Cornwell cabinet was voted out.

Senator Gray. Are they voted out directly, or is a vote of want of confidence the process?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. Then a vote of want of confidence means that the cabinet has ceased to hold office?

Mr. Jones. Yes. If they secure 25 votes, the cabinet must retire.

Senator Gray. Is that a majority?

Mr. Jones. That is a majority. On the 4th of January they brought in a vote of want of confidence in the Wilcox cabinet, and they secured only 19 votes. On the strength of that the minister went up to Hawaii with the Boston and was gone until it came back, on the very day that the Queen undertook to overthrow the Government by proclaiming the new constitution. We felt satisfied that she could not get the Wiicox cabinet out, and he thought there was no need of holding the Boston there any more; that there was no danger.

The Chairman. When did you first become aware of the fact that the Queen intended to abrogate the constitution of 1887?

Mr. Jones. On the evening of the 11th of January.

The Chairman. About what time?

Mr. Jones. It was about half past 6, just after dinner.

The Chairman. Who was your informant?

Mr. Jones. Mr. Henry Waterhouse.

The Chairman. What connection had he, if any, with the Government?

Mr. Jones. None whatever at that time.

The Chairman. Had he previously to that?

Mr. Jones. He had been a member of the Legislature; not that year.

The Chairman. He was a private citizen?

Mr. Jones. He was a private citizen. He got the information from Colburn's brother.

The Chairman. One of the men put into the ministry?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Did you have any communication with any member of this cabinet upon that subject?

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. None of them gave you any information as to the intention of the Queen to abrogate the constitution of 1887?

Mr. Jones. No.

-p580-

The Chairman. Was any statement made at either of these meetings of which you speak—the citizens' meeting on Saturday or the meeting of the new Provisional Government—to the effect that the Queen had abrogated or intended to abrogate the constitution of 1887?

Mr. Jones. Oh, yes; at the mass meeting it was stated.

The Chairman. By whom?

Mr. Jones. By the resolutions that were introduced.

The Chairman. Who gave information to the meeting of the fact of which those resolutions were predicated—that the Queen intended to abrogate or had abrogated the constitution of '87 ?

Mr. Jones. I think the committee of thirteen. You see, the mass meeting was held on Monday, the 16th; the attempt of the Queen to abrogate the constitution was on the 14th.

The Chairman. Saturday?

Mr. Jones. Saturday.

The Chairman. It was about that point of time that I wish to make inquiry. How did the people become possessed of the fact that the Queen had abrogated or intended to abrogate that constitution?

Mr. Jones. Why, the people who were there at the palace—Chief Justice Judd was there and heard her speech; quite a number of the diplomatic corps was there; a great many of the citizens and some members of the Legislature were there when the Queen made this attempt.

The Chairman. Was this after the Legislature had been prorogued?

Mr. Jones. Yes; immediately after.

The Chairman. Was it in the Government building?

Mr. Jones. In the palace.

The Chairman. Iolani?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. And this assemblage had met there for what purpose?

Mr. Jones. At the request of the Queen. And then it was announced that there was a great deal of delay; they could not understand why they were called there, and it got rumored about that the Queen intended to proclaim this constitution and the ministers were afraid to approve of it.

The Chairman. That was the rumor?

Mr. Jones. That was the rumor, and it was the fact, too.

The Chairman. Were you present at the time?

Mr. Jones. I was not; no.

The Chairman. As a matter of personal information you can not state what actually occurred?

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. What the Queen said or what anybody else said?

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. But, if I understand you, the information that such a movement had been made and that the Queen had spoken on that subject was disseminated throughout the community?

Mr. Jones. Oh, yes; by many witnesses who were there.

The Chairman. When did you get information that the Queen had recalled her intention?

Mr. Jones. On Monday morning.

The Chairman. Was that the soonest you heard of it, that there was any such intention on her part?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. So that, between Saturday and Monday, you were under the impression that the Queen had abrogated the constitution?

-p581-

Mr. Jones. Oh, no. She had attempted to do it, and had told the people that she could not carry out her plans that day, but if they would go to their homes, in a very few days she would proclaim the new constitution.

The Chairman. Did you ever see that new constitution?

Mr. Jones. No. We offered $500 for a copy of it and could not secure it. Oh, they destroyed it after that.

The Chairman. Have you any knowledge who it was prepared that instrument?

Mr. Jones. It was said that the Queen prepared it herself.

The Chairman. With her own hand?

Mr. Jones. That is as I understand it. That is the report that came to us—that it was her own constitution; she prepared the whole of it.

The Chairman. With your knowledge of the intelligence of the Queen, would you suppose she is capable of drawing up such a constitution?

Mr. Jones. I should say not.

Senator Gray. Does she speak English?

Mr. Jones. Oh, yes.

Senator Gray. What is her customary dialect—native language?

Mr. Jones. She will talk English if those who are about her speak English; if there are those about who understand both English and Hawaiian, she prefers to talk the Hawaiian.

Senator Gray. What is the prevailing language in the city of Honolulu; the Hawaiian language?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. Do you use it in your business?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. Do the Portuguese use it?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. Do the Germans and others use it?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. As they do our language here?

Mr. Jones. Yes. All the discussion in the legislature is in English and Hawaiian, because the Hawaiians speak in Hawaiian and then it is interpreted, translated into English, and then those who speak in English, their language is interpreted, translated into Hawaiian.

Senator Gray. You all understand the Hawaiian language?

Mr. Jones. Not thoroughly.

Senator Gray. Can you speak it?

Mr. Jones. Well, tolerably well.

Senator Gray. Do you understand it when it is spoken?

Mr. Jones. Yes. I should hate to attempt an address in Hawaiian.

Senator Gray. But you understand it?

Mr. Jones. I can understand it for ordinary purposes.

Senator Gray. Have the Hawaiians any literature in their own language?

Mr. Jones. Very little indeed.

The Chairman. Before the Monday, before the mass meeting of the citizens of which you speak, did you have any information of the fact, if it was a fact, that the Queen's ministers, the latest ministers, or any of them, had announced that they refused to sign the constitution with her—to assist her in its promulgation?

Mr. Jones. Late Saturday they refused to.

The Chairman. Well, you had information of that on Saturday?

Mr. Jones. We heard of that on Saturday.

-p582-

The Chairman. Whom did that information come from—the ministers?

Mr. Jones. From the ministers themselves; yes.

The Chairman. Did any of these ministers attend any of these meetings?

Mr. Jones. Yes; Peterson and Colburn were there.

The Chairman. When you were present?

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. So that you do not know what they said?

Mr. Jones. No, I do not; I was not present.

The Chairman. Well, you can state whether it was commonly understood, rumored there, stated among those people, that the ministers had disclosed the fact that the Queen had desired them to join her in the promulgation of this new constitution?

Mr. Jones. Yes. They undoubtedly went into office pledged to support her in it.

The Chairman. What reason have you for that statement?

Mr. Jones. I think Mr. Colburn clearly pledged himself to it, and the others, too.

Senator Gray. Do you found that opinion upon that letter which you received?

Mr. Jones. Partially, and from other information. When the Queen —you said I might allude to rumors?

The Chairman. That is what I was asking about.

Mr. Jones. When the Queen urged them to sign the constitution, they asked for more time. She turned to Peterson and said, "Why more time; you have carried that constitution around in your pocket for more than a month—why do you want more time?"

Senator Gray. Who gave that account?

Mr. Jones. That came from the Palace that Saturday.

Senator Gray. By whom?

Mr. Jones. Well, I heard it. Chief Justice Judd told me.

Senator Gray. That he heard it?

Mr. Jones. I do not know whether he heard it or not; I could not say, but that was the rumor that was about, and I believe it was correct.

The Chairman. Chief Justice Judd told you?

Mr. Jones. He was at the Palace.

The Chairman. He told you of the fact, that he had been authentically informed?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Gray. Did he state whom he heard it from?

Mr. Jones. No; I could not say that.

Senator Gray. He stated it as a rumor?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. That is what I want to get at, whether the common belief of the people in Honolulu was that the Queen had caused to be prepared, or prepared herself, this new constitution, and had asserted her purpose to abrogate the constitution of 1887—supplant it by a new constitution?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. And it had been carried around in the pocket of Peterson for a month before that time?

Senator Gray. Let us understand. Do you mean that that was understood for a month before—that he was carrying it around?

Mr. Jones. Not that for a month.

Senator Gray. That Saturday you heard that?

-p583-

Mr. Jones. Yes—not that the rumor had been in circulation for a month, but the Queen declared that he, Peterson, had carried the constitution in his pocket for a month.

Senator Gray. That rumor came out on Saturday ?

Mr. Jones. On Saturday, yes.

The Chairman. State whether it was a part of the understanding of the general community that the ministry had refused to sign this new constitution with the Queen.

Mr. Jones. That day, yes.

The Chairman. I mean on that Saturday?

Mr. Jones. On that Saturday.

The Chairman. That was the public understanding?

Mr. Jones. They did. It was unquestionably so—they declined on that day to sign it.

The Chairman. On Saturday?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. And they gave information to the community that the Queen demanded of the ministry that they sign the constitution, and they refused to do it?

Mr. Jones. On that day, yes.

The Chairman. State whether it was part of that general understanding or rumor that they came to the citizens or any citizens to get advice as to what they ought to do under such circumstances.

Mr. Jones. Yes, they did. But I was not present at those meetings.

The Chairman. I am speaking of the common understanding of the people.

Mr Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Was that a part of it—that they had come to the citizens for advice as to what they should do?

Mr. Jones. They came to Thurston and asked his advice, and they were also present that afternoon at the meeting at W. O. Smith's office. I think that is included in Mr. Blount's report. But I was not present at that meeting.

The Chairman. Then, as I understand you, it was the common belief among the people of Honolulu from Saturday to Monday that the Queen had attempted to abrogate the constitution of 1887, and she had only failed because the ministry refused to sign with her?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. And also the common belief that the ministry, or some of them, when they took office had pledged themselves to this change of government?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Do you know of any combination or any conspiracy or concerted action or agreement or understanding prior to that revelation for supplanting the Queen in her government?

Mr. Jones. No; I do not.

The Chairman. Or for establishing a republic?

Mr. Jones. I do not.

The Chairman. Or for annexation to the United States?

Mr. Jones. I do not. The whole thing was like a thunder clap to the community, so far as I am aware, and nothing was thought of it until Saturday, when it was made public that the Queen was to withdraw the constitution of 1887, and these things culminated very fast. I knew nothing of anything of the kind.

The Chairman. If there had been any purpose on the part of a number of the people of Hawaii, of Honolulu, to dethrone the Queen

-p584-

or establish a republican form of government, or different form of government, or enthrone another royal personage, or get annexation to the United States prior to the time that the people were informed of the Queen's intention to abrogate the constitution of 1887, do you think you would have known of it?

Mr. Jones. I think I should, because of my intimacy with different people there.

The Chairman. You would say that whatever intention was formed in respect of these matters about which I have been inquiring, it arose from public information that was disseminated on that Saturday with regard to the Queen's intentions?

Mr. Jones. Yes, I say that.

The Chairman. Are you in any way connected with the clergy?

Mr. Jones. I am not. I am a member of the Hawaiian Board of Missions—a lay member.

The Chairman. To what extent, using the percentage, if you can do so with reasonable approximation of the fact, will you say that the native Kanaka population of Hawaii had become communicants of any Christian church?

Mr. Jones. Well, I should say, speaking without an actual knowledge of the facts, 75 per cent, although Mr. Emerson, who has appeared before you, could give you much better information than I could. I should think that such information might be furnished; but I am very poor at statistics, carrying things in my head.

The Chairman. So that you think, contrasting this Hawaiian community with pagan communities, the Hawaiian community is a Christian community?

Mr. Jones. Oh, yes.

The Chairman. They have the observance of the Sabbath?

Mr. Jones. Oh, they are very punctilious about that.

The Chairman. Have you laws also to assist them in the sanctity of the Sabbath?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Is the marriage relation recognized?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Is it a secular relation or religious?

Mr. Jones. The marriage relation is a religious ceremony.

The Chairman. Is it sustained and provided for by law—licensed?

Mr. Jones. Oh, yes; the marriage relations there are just as strict as they are here.

The Chairman. In regard to deceased persons, do they have regular administration of estates?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Have persons by law the right to bequeath their property?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Have you courts to enforce those rights?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. The laws in respect to temperance—what is the general character of them?

Mr. Jones. There are quite a number of laws on the statute books regulating the sales of liquors, and it is only for want of public opinion that many of them are not enforced. There is a general looseness there about enforcing some of the laws. The police are never anxious to do anything of that sort unless spurred on by public sentiment.

-p585-

Senator Gray. They do not differ from communities here?

Mr. Jones. Very like here.

The Chairman. Is the Kanaka element in the island addicted to intemperance?

Mr. Jones. Many of them.

The Chairman. Well, take the majority.

Mr. Jones. I am sorry to say that I think so, if they get the opportunity— not all of them, but I would say a majority.

The Chairman. So that it is an evil that is not to be controlled absolutely by public opinion, but you find it necessary to enact laws?

Mr. Jones. Oh, yes.

The Chairman. Are they of a stringent character?

Mr. Jones. Stringent—that is, some; particularly as to licenses. We have a high license. There are many stipulations in the license which, if rigidly observed, would make a great deal of difference in the liquor habit.

The Chairman. Is the distillation of spirits by Government authority?

Mr. Jones. Oh, yes.

The Chairman. Whoever distils spirits there must have a Government license?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. And your tariff laws—do they relate to the importation of liquors?

Mr. Jones. There is a high tariff on liquors.

Senator Gray. To promote home manufacture?

Mr. Jones. No; that is more for the sake of revenue. There is nothing done there in the way of home manufacture.

Senator Gray. I understood you to say awhile ago that the distillation law was largely for the purpose of encouraging home manufacture.

Mr. Jones. This law that was passed I am not familiar with. It was introduced before I went into the House. I think it became a law during my incumbency, as I stated to Senator Morgan early in our conversation. I am not familiar with it.

Senator Gray. It was this last law to which you refer?

Mr. Jones. Yes. It was introduced, I think, by someone to make it a sort of popular thing with some of the natives, and there has never been anything done about it since.

The Chairman. This Provisional Government in Hawaii, as I understand it, has repealed that opium law?

Mr. Jones. Yes, and the lottery law.

The Chairman. They have not repealed the distillation bill?

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. On the subject of education. You have given a very flattering account of the progress of education in Hawaii. Who have had that subject in charge since the first appearance of civilization in the Hawaiian Islands—mainly in charge?

Mr. Jones. The missionaries, originally. Since then the board of education, which has always been made up of our very best citizens. Prof. Alexander, who is to appear before you, has been and is now acting president of the board of education, and he is very familiar with that question.

The Chairman. Then I will not trouble you on that question. But I will ask you this—whether in the absence of the labor of the missionaries

-p586-

in the direction of educating the people they would have been educated to the degree they are now?

Mr. Jones. Oh, no; it was owing to the missionaries that the Hawaiians have been brought to what they are.

The Chairman. What King was on the throne when you went to Hawaii?

Mr. Jones. Kamehameha IV.

The Chairman. What year did you say that was?

Mr. Jones. That was in 1857.

The Chairman. That was after the constitution of 1854 had been proclaimed?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Did Kamehameha IV have in his cabinet any of the American missionary element?

Mr. Jones. In my day, no.

The Chairman. Did he have any American citizens in his cabinet?

Mr. Jones. Oh, he had, I think, David L. Gray. I think he took the position of minister of finance in the cabinet of Kamehameha IV.

The Chairman. How long did he remain in office?

Mr. Jones. I do not remember; two or three years, perhaps.

The Chairman. Was there any other person who was a member of the Kamehameha cabinet—Kamehameha IV—any American citizen?

Mr. Jones. I do not remember any American except Gray. Mr. Wilie, a Scotchman, was in for many years.

The Chairman. Was he a missionary?

Mr. Jones. Oh, no; he was rather an anti-missionary.

Senator Gray. What do you mean by "anti-missionary?"

Mr. Jones. I do not think he was in full sympathy with the missionaries. I would not call him what we call an anti-missionary man to-day.

Senator Gray. What was he?

Mr. Jones. He was minister of foreign affairs for many years.

The Chairman. Then Kamehameha V had white men in his cabinet?

Mr. Jones. He had three Americans in his cabinet.

The Chairman. Who were they ?

Mr. Jones. He had Charles Coffin Harris, formerly of New Hampshire; he had J. Mott Smith, who was then Hawaiian minister here; he had Stephen H. Phillips, a lawyer. Phillips was his attorney-general.

The Chairman. All Americans?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. American citizens?

Mr. Jones. American citizens; yes.

The Chairman. Then did he have other white men, from Europe, in his cabinet—I mean Kamehameha V?

Mr. Jones. Yes; he had Dr. Hutchinson for years; I think he was an Englishman.

The Chairman. Well, the next King?

Mr. Jones. The next King was Lunalilo; he lived but fourteen months. That cabinet was comprised of three Americans. They always speak of the missionary children there as Americans, because they always claim to be Americans. That cabinet was composed of Hon. C. R. Bishop, minister of foreign affairs; E. O. Hall, minister of the interior—he was formerly connected with the mission; and A. F. Judd, who was attorney-general.

The Chairman. And then chief justice of the supreme court?

Mr. Jones. Yes. He was attorney-general.

-p587-

The Chairman. Under Lunalilo?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Then, after Lunalilo came Kalakaua?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Did he have Americans in his cabinet?

Mr. Jones. Yes. He had A. S. Hartwell in his first cabinet and Sam Wilder, an American. I forget the other two now. He had a great many cabinets. There were generally one or more Americans in his cabinet.

The Chairman. He changed his cabinet very often?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Were those changes made because of want of confidence?

Mr. Jones. Oh, no. It was his own sweet will that he turned them out.

Senator Frye. That is, he was King.

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Did Kalakaua have the right to dismiss his cabinet without the Legislature?

Mr. Jones. Yes, under the constitution of '87.

The Chairman. Under that provision of the constitution giving authority he made frequent changes in his cabinet?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Now, speaking of these men in the different cabinets, commencing with Kamehameha V down to Kalakaua and his cabinets, were any of these men impeached by the people of Hawaii for any disloyalty to the Government?

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. Or any crime against the Government?

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. Were they men of fine character?

Mr. Jones. Many of them were. Do you include Kalakaua?

The Chairman. I am speaking of the first cabinet of Kalakaua?

Mr. Jones. I should say most of them were men of good character.

The Chairman. You would consider that they were not a disintegrating or disloyal element in the monarchy?

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. They gave full support there?

Mr. Jones. They gave full support there. Yes, so far as I ever knew. Of course I knew nothing of the inner workings of the Government in those days. But none of them were ever impeached for dishonesty of purpose, doubted, to my knowledge.

The Chairman. What is the opinion among the more intelligent people of Hawaii as to the reasons that influenced Kalakaua to make so many changes in his cabinet?

Mr. Jones. Well, for the purpose of gaining supreme power. If he found an obstacle in his way he would do it at once.

The Chairman. Was it the opinion of the people of Hawaii that Kalakaua wanted that supreme power of government for the benefit of the government, or for his personal advantage?

Mr. Jones. For his personal advantage only.

The Chairman. There was at one time a colony of Mormons there?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Who established that colony?

Mr. Jones. Gibson. He was afterwards Kalakaua's factotum.

The Chairman. In Kalakaua's cabinet?

-p588-

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Do you know where Gibson came from before he arrived at the Hawaiian islands?

Mr. Jones. I think he came from the Mormon settlement in Salt Lake.

The Chairman. Do you remember whether he brought any Mormons over with him?

Mr. Jones. I do not.

The Chairman. Was there in any particular part of the islands a populous Mormon colony?

Mr. Jones. The island of Lanai was set apart as a colony for Mormons— as a Mormon settlement.

The Chairman. Who controlled that settlement?

Mr. Jones. Gibson.

The Chairman. It was after that settlement was made—set apart— that Gibson became a member of Kalakaua's cabinet?

Mr. Jones. Oh, yes; long after.

The Chairman. How long did Gibson remain in Kalakaua's cabinet?

Mr. Jones. He remained through several changes. Gibson would always be in the new deal.

The Chairman. During the time that Gibson was a member of Kalauaka's cabinet Don Celso Caesar Moreno appeared there?

Mr. Jones. I have forgotten. I think Moreno—I have forgotten; I was away when Moreno went in; I was away in the States.

The Chairman. You do not know of that except by public reputation?

Mr. Jones. I was not there.

The Chairman. He became a member of the cabinet?

Mr. Jones. Moreno?

The Chairman. Yes.

Mr. Jones. He was there only three days.

The Chairman. He became a member of the cabinet?

Mr. Jones. Yes, minister of foreign affairs for three days, I think.

The Chairman. Do you know what circumstances led to his being dismissed?

Mr. Jones. At the request of a public meeting.

The Chairman. Of the citizens, demanding that he should be removed?

Mr. Jones. Yes; and he was. As I say, I was not there at the time.

The Chairman. I am speaking of the general rumor or historical traditions of Hawaii on that subject. Before his removal what disposition did he make of the foreign ministry ?

Mr. Jones. Who?

The Chairman. Moreno.

Senator Frye During the three days that he was in there, what did he do?

Mr. Jones. I have forgotten. For matters of history you will find Prof. Alexander right up. He has written a history of the islands.

The Chairman. I was trying to get from you the general impressions of the people of Hawaii on this subject. I know you do not know it in detail. Did Moreno leave the islands?

Mr. Jones. Oh, he had to leave.

The Chairman. Was he banished?

Mr. Jones. The opposition was so great that he had to leave.

The Chairman. He came there, to the islands, from China?

-p589-

Mr. Jones. I have not known anything of him since that time, only that he has been here in Washington. I have heard of him occasionally.

The Chairman. Had the people of Hawaii any opinion as to the reasons or causes which gave Moreno the ascendancy over Kalakaua— made him premier of Kalakaua's cabinet?

Mr. Jones. I am not aware of the reasons?

The Chairman. You do not know the reasons?

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. No public sentiment or belief in regard to the reasons?

Mr. Jones. None that I know of.

The Chairman. What became of Gibson?

Mr. Jones. Gibson in 1887—the revolution of 1887—was put out of office, and then he was virtually deported. He went to California and never returned.

The Chairman. What became of his Mormon colony that he took over with him?

Mr. Jones. That disappeared, went to pieces, and then Gibson obtained possession of the island of Lanai for his own purposes, and that is all broken up now.

The Chairman. Did he sell it?

Mr. Jones. No; his daughter inherited the property of Lanai.

The Chairman. She is in possession of the whole island?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. About how much?

Mr. Jones. There are crown lands there and other lands in the island. She is the owner of the property that was originally purchased for the Mormons, as I understand.

The Chairman. This daughter has succeeded to the title?

Mr. Jones. She enjoys all that Jones died possessed of.

The Chairman. Considerable estate?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. About how much?

Mr. Jones. I suppose it is worth perhaps $100,000. And there is something of a mortgage upon it; I do not know how much. I have never been on the land.

The Chairman. Do you know the area?

Mr. Jones. I do not know.

The Chairman. You do not know whether it is good land or not?

Mr. Jones. It is mostly for sheep-raising; very little for other purposes. I have never been upon the land.

The Chairman. You have mentioned two members of the Kalakaua cabinet—Moreno and Gibson. Was there any other man in Kalakaua's cabinet whose reputation was not good among the people of Hawaii for honesty and loyalty?

Mr. Jones. I do not recall to mind any others. I do not know how many he had. He had a large number of cabinets, but I do not recall any of them to mind just now but those two.

The Chairman. Were Gibson and Moreno there in the cabinet before this revolution of 1887 occurred?

Mr. Jones. Yes; Gibson was in the cabinet in the revolution.

The Chairman. During the revolution?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. And he was dismissed in consequence of the revolution?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

-p590-

The Chairman. Just state generally the manner in which that revolution was set on foot.

Senator Gray. What revolution?

The Chairman. Of 1887. State generally the manner in which the revolution was set on foot. I mean by that whether it was done by the citizens meeting or by the King himself, or how?

Mr. Jones. It was by a series of acts of the King that stirred the citizens up, and a secret league was formed. An organization that culminated in a mass meeting and a demand for a new constitution to clip the wings of the King—to which the King acceded without any question.

The Chairman. Did he first make resistance by arms?

Mr. Jones. No; his native soldiers all fled. He was in a much better position to resist than Liliuokalani was when the revolution of last year came. But he could not depend upon his native forces.

The Chairman. They abandoned him?

Mr. Jones. They abandoned him and there was no courage in him.

The Chairman. Did they abandon him through fear or disgust?

Mr. Jones. Oh, through fear.

The Chairman. Fear of the people?

Mr. Jones. Yes; he did a great many things that were unbecoming a king. His ambition was to get control of everything, and the people rose up and stopped it. And his sister seems to have followed right in his footsteps.

The Chairman. Kalakaua was seated on the Hawaiian throne by an act of the Legislature?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Under the constitution of 1860?

Mr. Jones. 1860.

The Chairman. He was not a member of the royal family?

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. Was any vote of the people of Hawaii taken as to whether Kalakaua should be by them elected king?

Mr. Jones. No; no vote of the people; vote of the Legislature. He was not the choice of the people by any means.

The Chairman. Who would have been the choice of the people at that time?

Mr. Jones. Queen Emma.

The Chairman. She had royal blood in her?

Mr. Jones. No; she was the wife of Kamehameha IV. Lunalilo submitted his election to the people and he got almost the entire vote of the country. I think there wore only six votes against him. When he died he declined to appoint his successor. He was allowed by the constitution to appoint his successor, but he declined to do it. He said he was elected by the people, and he would rather submit it back to the people. The Legislature had the power under the constitution to elect a king, and they elected Kalakaua.

The Chairman. A man without any pretensions to royal blood?

Mr. Jones. Yes; he had no pretensions to royal blood?

The Chairman. There was a person at the time of his election in Hawaii, a relative of the royal family?

Mr. Jones. Mrs. Bishop was one of the Kamehamehas, but she declined to take the throne also.

The Chairman. Was there not a man?

Mr. Jones. Kuniakea, do you mean?

The Chairman. Yes; he was a scion of the royal family?

-p591-

Mr. Jones. I think he was, perhaps, an illegitimate son of Kamehameha III; I am not sure.

The Chairman. Not recognized as belonging to the royal family.

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. Is he still living?

Mr. Jones. Yes, he is still living.

The Chairman. But no importance attaches to him as of royal blood?

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. So that the election of Kalakaua was an entire departure, so far as the royal blood was concerned—a new dynasty?

Mr. Jones. Yes; a new dynasty altogether.

The Chairman. And Liliuokalani?

Mr. Jones. Liliuokalani is the sister of Kalakaua. Princess Kaiulani is the daughter of Princess Likelike.

The Chairman. So that Kaiulani is the niece of Liliuokalani?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. How did Liliuokalani become possessed of royal authority?

Mr. Jones. Her brother appointed her his successor, under the old constitution.

The Chairman. Under the constitution of 1860?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Was that done before the revolution of 1887?

Mr. Jones. Oh, yes. It was done almost, I think, as soon as he ascended the throne. He appointed his brother and then his sister. He appointed his brother first and then his sister Liliuokalani, and she appointed, under the constitution of 1887, Kaiulani as her successor.

The Chairman. That was after Liliuokalani ascended the throne?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. So that Kalakaua was elected by the Legislature, and during his reign he appointed his sister Liliuokalani his successor?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Then came the revolution of 1887 and the new constitution of 1887?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. That did not disturb Liliuokalani's appointment under the constitution of 1860 ?

Mr. Jones. No, they recognized that.

The Chairman. Were the claims of Liliuokalani in any way submitted to the people?

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. Or of Kaiulani?

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. None were since Lunalilo VI?

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. That was done entirely on his request?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Having his successor confirmed by the people?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Has any constitution ever been submitted to the people for their vote or ratification?

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. Any amendment?

Mr. Jones. Amendment? Yes—not to the people direct.

The Chairman. I mean to the people. The process of amendment

-p592-

is by majority vote, and it goes to the next Legislature, and by a two-thirds vote it becomes an amendment to the constitution.

Mr. Jones. Yes. There were one or two amendments to the constitution of 1887 at the last Legislature. That is, the former Legislature voted and it was confirmed by the present Legislature.

The Chairman. But there has been no original vote on an amendment of the constitution or an original amendment by the people?

Mr. Jones. No.

Senator Frye. The present constitution takes from the Queen practically all power, does it not, and vests it in the cabinet?

Mr. Jones. Yes. There is no act of hers that is valid without the signature of one of the ministers. The ministers are directly responsible, and she is not responsible.

Senator Frye. I understand that; we have the constitution. Now, when you went into the Government building to take possession the Queen's ministers disappeared, as I understand?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Frye. And you immediately took possession of the various offices of the building, the archives, the treasury, and everything?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

The Chairman. Now, when you were at that mass meeting at the armory building, was not information conveyed to that meeting that the Queen was going to postpone that new constitution, and was not the question asked that meeting whether that would do?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Frye. What was the reply?

Mr. Jones. The unanimous reply was, "No, no." They would not believe in it. Kalakaua tried the same dodge.

Senator Frye. In Mr. Blount's report he speaks of the Queen having six or seven hundred troops and sixteen cannon, etc. Did the Queen have any such people there?

Mr. Jones. No. There were about, as far as we were informed, fifty or sixty men down at the station house, and there were seventy or eighty troops at the barracks.

Senator Frye. What are those Hawaiian troops—the Queen's Guard?

Mr. Jones. Yes; around the palace; do palace duty, do the reviewing on state occasions, and things of that sort.

Senator Frye. That Queen's Guard and the police at the police station made no attempt during all these proceedings against your meeting or toward taking possession of the Government building?

Mr. Jones. No.

Senator Frye. Were your people armed at the public meeting?

Mr. Jones. Many of them may have had pistols on them, but not to my knowledge. I saw no arms.

Senator Frye. Was any attempt made to disperse that meeting?

Mr. Jones. No. The only attempt made was by getting up a counter meeting to draw people away from attending. But the house was packed.

Senator Frye. Now, as to the landing of troops. You were there shortly after the troops were landed? You were in Honolulu?

Mr. Jones. Yes, I was in Honolulu.

Senator Frye. Do you know where the troops were located and why they were located and how ?

Senator Gray. Of your own knowledge.

Mr. Jones. Oh, yes. I know that there was a squad stationed at

-p593-

the American minister's, and another one at the American consul's, and the balance of them at Arion Hall.

Senator Frye. And Arion Hall was off to the east or west of the Government building?

Mr. Jones. West of the Government building.

Senator Frye. A street between?

Mr. Jones. Yes.

Senator Frye. Do you know whether or not any attempt was made to obtain other locations?

Mr. Jones. I think there was an attempt made to secure the Music Hall, just in front.

Senator Frye. That failed?

Mr. Jones. That failed.

Senator Gray. Of your personal knowledge?

Mr. Jones. All I know of that is, I have read the reports of it. That is the way I obtained the knowledge.

Senator Frye. You were at the Government building frequently. Did you ever see, during this revolution, any of the American soldiers marching on the streets?

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. Did you, as a member of the new Government, expect to receive any assistance from them?

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. Do you know whether or not your fellows were looking for any help?

Mr. Jones. I never knew that they were.

Senator Frye. As a matter of fact, did they give any assistance to the revolution at all?

Mr. Jones. No.

The Chairman. Let me ask you right there, is it your belief that that revolution would have occurred if the Boston had not arrived in the harbor?

Mr. Jones. I believe it would have gone on just the same if she had been away from the islands altogether.

Senator Gray. Was anything said in your conferences that day or the next in regard to the troops—anything said about that at all in your hearing?

Mr. Jones. No. I was not at any of those meetings until Tuesday.

SWORN STATEMENT OF ZEPHANIAH SWIFT SPALDING.

The Chairman. You are a native of the United States?

Mr. Spalding. Yes; I was born in Ohio.

The Chairman. What is your age!

Mr. Spalding. I am 56—was born September, 1837.

The Chairman. When did you first go to Hawaii?

Mr. Spalding. I was sent out to Hawaii in 1867 by Secretary Seward.

The Chairman. As an official of any character?

Mr. Spalding. Yes, I was what was termed secret or confidential agent of the State Department. I was bearer of dispatches to the minister at Washington and under pay from the State Department, from its secret-service fund.

S. Doc. 231, pt 6----38


Previous Page Next Page