The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1859-06-02
the anne immunity is demanded by every foreign

the same immunity is demanded BY every foreign
nation.
Oth.-Extraordinary powers are granted to French
consuls, in the administration on estates OF deceased
French subjects.
11th.-Al the privileges granted by this treaty to
French subjects can be claimed by every foreign gov
ernment with whom We have . treaty. for its sub
jects-
l2th.-To sum up all. the treaty recognizes an
open violation Of our rights as an independent sover-
eighty is partial in its operation; exacting and nm,
Just in its demands; a burden to the industry and
resources of . weak nation; and . disgrace to the
Ministry of Kamehameha Nv.
We republish below the rejected article
ADDITIONAL ARTICLE.
CAD KEFERESDuN9
Whereas, it is contended that a literal c~onstruc-
ton of the foregoing treaty would abrogate the laws
of the Hawaiian kingdom, by which the retail trafhc
in liquors is confined to Honolulu, it is hereby
declared, with q view to the expression OF the true
meaning and intention of the negotiators, that the
right Of f Municipal M. nar, Il r ,as G 2 i2 8 oi sai d t snsa
dom, is hereby recognized.
And whereas, the Third Article of said treaty is
founded on the preference given by law to the English
language over the French language IN the custom
House, it is agreed that France will cease to claim
the privilege established by that article as soon as
such legal preference is abolished by the Hawaiian
Government.
1t is understood that exemption accorded to consuls
in the 18th Article of the foregoing treaty is to extend
only to their appearance in courts of justice as
witnesses, and not to their liability as. parties, IN
conformity with the existing law of nations.
And it is further understood and agreed that the
power of administration upon ~intestate estates given
to consuls by the foregoing treaty, shall only extend
to consuls not engaged in business, and shall not be
construed TO preclude the right of local tribunals to
decide an questions of testacy or intestacy, and to
entertain appeals relating to such administration
from parties considering themselves aggrieved by the
decision of the consul or his authorized agent.
And it is further declared and agreed that the
18th Article in the aforesaid treaty shall be under
stood in the sense that all vessels recognized rs
French vessels by the law of France shall be con-
sidered to be French vessels i'll the ports OF the
Hawaiian Kingdom, and all Hawaiian vessels re-
cognized as such by the Hawaiian laws shall be
considere4 Hawaiian vessels in the ports of France
and her possessions.
HoSoLuLu. 18th September, 1853.
(Signed,) (Signed,) (Signed,)
En-. PERRIN. L. KAMEHAMEHA. X. c. WYLLIE.
(Seal] lSeal.] lSeaL1
RESOLUTION OF THE PRIvY COUNCIL
WHEREAS, the Additional Article to the treaty be-
tween his Majesty the King of the Hawaiian Islands,
and his Imperial Majesty the Emperor of the French,
concluded on the 29th of October, 1857, proposed by
potentiary of France, has been accepted by said
Plenipotenfiary ad referendum:
lind lchereas, the said Additional Article obviates
many of the objections which have hitherto prevented
this Council from advising his Majesty the King to
ratify said treaty:
Therefore, be it resolved, That this Council do
now, in the discharge of its duty under the Constitu-
ton, respectfully advise his Majesty the King to
ratify the treaty signed Mt Honolulu by his Plenipo-
tentiaries, and by the Plenipotentiary of his Majesty
the Emperor of the French, on the 29th of October,
1857, subject however expressly to the provisions and
stipulations contained in said Additional Article, to
stand as an integral part of said treaty, which said
Additional Article is in the words and figures follow
ing, to wit:
(See the ADDITIONAL ARTICLE a5ore.J
A true copy of a Resolution passed in the
Privy Council on Thurday, September
I'd, 1853.
CHARLES GORDON HOPKINS.
Secretary pro TEN.
No one can read the above without being con-
WINGED of two things First, that the King would
never have signed the treaty nor the Privy Coun-
Gil have acquiesced in, it without some such
understanding as is embraced in the appended
article. Second, that the main object of that ar
ticle was to secure the ratification of the treaty.
His Majesty's Ministers knew very well that the
French Emperor might not sanction it, and con-
that the treaty, if signed by the King,
as it then was conditionally, must go into force,
,ohether the article ,cas accepted or not. We do
not charge His Mac 5 Ministers with dishonor-
able motives in seeking to inveigle the Sovereign
into the sanction of an instrument which we have
every reason to believe neither He, his Privy
Council, nor his subjects can approve of; yet
one can hardly avoid being of that opinion af-
ter a candid review of the whole affair. The
notice which appears at the head of this article
is given, accepting the treaty as binding, because
there is now no way of getting extricated from
the network in which the maneuvers of the Min
istry have placed the Government.
There is now no hope for us. The treaty is
passed and must 90 into force on the 9Th of
September, 1859, and we must abide by it. Time
will reveal that we have not shown half its faults,
and that it is one of the most successful diplo-
efforts to entapgle a nation in wrangling
and virtually to deprive it of its indie
pendence, that was ever effected in any age or
under any sovereign.
Private Rights vs.. Diploma tic Privileges.
\ little fracas occurred on Sunday last, which
invoIves a uuestion of considerable inheritance