Wasn't the Morgan Report only signed by Morgan?

From TheMorganReport
Revision as of 05:25, 14 January 2006 by Jere Krischel (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

A common critique of the Morgan Report is that there was no majority opinion, and that three separate opinions existed - Morgan's, the Republicans' and the Democrats'.

This is a misconception. If you look at pages 363-398, towards the end you will find that there is a break between the written report, and the signatures of the Republicans who joined Morgan, a democrat in the majority opinion with only a few disagreements related to the constitutionality of Blount's appointment.

"We are in entire accord with the essential findings in the exceedingly able report submitted by the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations."

The four Democrats who disagreed with the four Republicans, and the Morgan (again, a Democrat), clearly indicate their minority dissent, signing their four names as "Members of Minority". Even though they dissented, they minority held the U.S. troops blameless:

"On the other hand, we are not inclined to censure Capt. Wiltse, commanding the United States war-ship Boston, or the officers of that vessel. Their position was one of extreme delicacy and difficulty, and we appreciate their anxiety to afford protection to the lives and property of American citizens. The force of United States marines of the Boston with their ordinary arms stationed at the American legation, and at the consulate in Honolulu, would have effectually represented the authority and power of the United States Government, and would have afforded whatever protection American interests might have required; and at the same time would have avoided the appearance of coercion or duress, either upon the people of Honolulu or the Queen in the controversy between them."

So for those who are counting, here's the score:

  • 9-0: U.S. Troops were completely neutral
  • 5-4: Blount's appointment was constitutional (Morgan + his fellow Democrats)
  • 5-4: Steven's actions were justified (Morgan + 4 Republicans)

Put another way:

None of the senators thought the U.S. troops had anything to do with the overthrow. Four of them wanted to chastise Blount's appointment and secret mission to Hawaii, and four of them wanted to censure Stevens for his actions "conducive" to the overthrow.