tion of her rights. This treaty, after having been duly signed, was immediately submitted by President Harrison to the Senate for ratification, accompanied by a message in which he said:

"The overthrow of the monarchy was not in any way promoted by this Government, but had its origin in what seemed to have been a reactionary and revolutionary policy on the part of Queen Liliuokalani, which put in serious peril not only the large and preponderating interests of the United States in the Islands, but all foreign interests, and indeed, the decent administration of civil affairs and the peace of the Islands. . . . The restoration of Queen Liliuokalani to her throne is undesirable, if not impossible; and unless actively supported by the United States, would be accompanied by serious disaster and the disorganisation of all business interests. The influence and interest of the United States in the Islands must be increased and not diminished.

"It is essential that none of the great Powers shall secure these Islands. Such a possession would not consist with our safety and with the peace of the world. This view of the situation is so apparent and conclusive that no protest has been heard from any Government against proceedings looking to annexation. Every foreign representative at Honolulu promptly acknowledged the Provisional Government, and I think there is a general concurrence in the opinion that the deposed Queen ought not to be restored." 56

President Harrison's assertion that the United States had had no part in the revolution in Hawaii was regarded by the opposition as disingenuous. It was said that Mr. Dole and his associates were simply conspirators, who had acted in accordance with a preconceived plan, the details of which had been fully communicated to the American Government. The opportune presence of the Boston at Honolulu was viewed as something more than a coincidence. The action of Mr. Stevens was denounced as

56 Message of February 15th, 1893.

treacherous to the Government to which he had been accredited. The whole affair was described as an outrage upon a helpless people and as an attempt on the part of Mr. Harrison and his advisers to seize territory in a distant part of the world without any shadow of justification. The white residents of Hawaii were styled "carpet-baggers," and their new Government a barefaced usurpation. Many sneers were directed at these "sons of missionaries," who, though aliens, had deprived the natives of their political birthright.

Reviewing this affair in the light of all that is now known, two facts stand out beyond the possibility of refutation. In the first place, there can be no doubt that Queen Liliuokalani had justly forfeited her throne. She had violated the Constitution which she had solemnly sworn to maintain, and was proceeding to action such as would, in the case of an English sovereign, have led at once to the forfeiture of the royal rights. Furthermore, the sneers aimed at the "sons of missionaries" as aliens, were thoroughly unwarranted. Mr. Dole, for instance, and his immediate associates were not aliens at all. Though of foreign ancestry, they had been born in Hawaii. Their homes were there. All their interests were there. They were the ones who had transformed the island. into a civilised and prosperous community. It was they who maintained the system of public education, who paid the greater part of the taxes, and who supported the administration of the laws. If revolution is ever justifiable—and of this no Anglo-Saxon can feel any doubtthe revolution in Hawaii was surely so, as being the act of men defending their political liberties and personal rights.

On the other hand, it may be regarded as absolutely certain that the American Minister, Mr. Stevens, was not only

well aware of what was going on, but that he had fully informed his Government, and that President Harrison and his advisers sympathised with the annexation movement. In February of 1892, Mr. Stevens had written to the State Department a letter in which he said:

"There are increasing indications that the annexation sentiment is gaining among the business men."

On March 8th of the same year, he had asked Mr. Blaine for special instructions, "in case the Government here should be reorganised and overturned by an orderly and peaceful revolutionary movement. I have information which I deem reliable that there is an organised revolutionary party in the Islands. . . . These people are very likely to overthrow the monarchy and establish a republic with the ultimate view of annexation to the United States."

On December 30th, Admiral Skerrett, who was under orders to take command of the Pacific Squadron, had called at the Navy Department in Washington for final instructions. He said to the Secretary:

"Mr. Tracy, I want to ask you about these Hawaiian affairs. When I was out there twenty years ago, I had frequent conversations with the then United States Minister, Mr. Pierce, on the subject of the Islands. I was told then that the United States Government did not wish to annex the islands of Hawaii.”

Mr. Tracy answered:

The wishes of the Government have changed. They will be very glad to annex Hawaii. As a matter of course, none but the ordinary legal means can be used to persuade these people to come into the United States."

"All right, sir," answered Admiral Skerrett, "I only wanted to know how things were going on, as a cue to my action." 57

Finally, Mr. Stevens, on the day when the American marines were landed in Honolulu, had sent a despatch to Washington saying, "The Hawaiian pear is now fully ripe, and this is the golden hour for the United States to pluck it."

From all these facts, it is quite obvious that the American Government was fully aware of the impending revolution and was in sympathy with it as a means of securing the annexation of the Islands. Whether the revolution would have succeeded had not marines been landed from the Boston at the critical moment is a purely hypothetical question. As to the morality of the whole proceeding, opinions will always differ. At the time, the administration received much harsh criticism, and though President Harrison, in his message of February 15th, urged the Senate to ratify the annexation treaty at once, definite action upon it was delayed. The sands of the Harrison administration were fast running out. Its hours were numbered; and the Hawaiian question was soon to assume a new form and to pass through many different phases before it reached a final settlement. A few days more, and another hand had laid a firm grasp upon the helm of State.

57 Senate Report on Hawaii, p. 10 (1893). See President Cleveland's message of December 18, 1893, with the appended documents.

ماما

CHAPTER VI

THE ELECTION OF 1892

AFTER witnessing President's Harrison's inauguration, Mr. Cleveland had left Washington and presently became a resident of New York City, where he resumed the practice of law, as an associate of the firm of Bangs, Stetson, Tracy and MacVeagh. In the eyes of the professional politicians of both parties, his public career seemed to have ended, and to have ended in utter failure. He was regarded as one who had, by an accident of politics, attained a transitory greatness to which he had proved to be personally unequal. His dogged determination in forcing an apparently unpopular issue, almost on the eve of a presidential election and merely as a matter of conviction, had been quite incomprehensible at the time, and the result appeared to justify the contempt which partisans such as Senator Gorman and Governor Hill confidentially expressed to their intimates. They felt that Mr. Cleveland had now been eliminated from national politics. He had settled down as an every-day lawyer in a great cosmopolitan city, where the complexity of life and the clash of material interests reduce even the most eminent of its citizens to comparative obscurity. Mr. Henry Watterson rather complacently remarked at this time: "Cleveland in New York reminds one of a stone thrown into a river. There is a 'plunk,' a splash, and then silence."

The ex-President accepted this verdict with philosophical good humour. He had nothing to regret. He had acted in accordance with his sense of right, and had done