590-591

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

Reports of Committee on Foreign Relations 1789-1901 Volume 6 pp590-591 300dpi scan (VERY LARGE!)

Text Only


-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


Previous Page Next Page