The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1878-07-13
SYNOPSIS OF MIR. RHODES REMARKS II THE
ASSEMBLY. TUESDAY. JULY 9TH.

upon WAS Uy IUT IWC must IWFUIIdHNV y JIG 20
and deserved the most careful consideration Of tht
House; for the determination Of the Assembly would
have q most material effect for good or evil on Tho
future Of Hawaii. lie had carefully gone over The
reports. and was sorry to be obliged to say that from
the minority report presented by the Hon. Chairman
of the Committee be had gained but little informa'
ton as to the state Of our relations with the Govern
ment Of Great Brittun. A great portion OF that
report consisted of cor vespondence between Mr.. Car
ter during the time he filled the Office of Minister Of
Foreign Affairs and Mr.. Wodehouse, Tier British
Majesty's Commissioner, on the subject OF the Anglo
Hawaiian Treaty Of 1851, and the manner in which
it would be affected by { he Treaty OF RECIPROCITY
with the United States.
1t would be useless for him 70 60 over the whole OF
these documents, or to take u the time OF the House
by a heightened criticism Ct their contents; but he
should pick out some of the pas sages that struck HIM
most forcibly, and contrast them with others,ln order
TO arrive at a fair and sound conclusion. The hrst
he would select was a passage from Nlr carter $
letter Of May 2lst, 1877, in which he SAID; IKE
ferring to the first and third points Of this summary
of your note, l have TO say that the duties in this
kingdom are levied upon certain goods or classes OF
goods, and not upon British produce or goods Of
British origin"
He CNIr. Rhodes) would ask them, did British
goods not pay duty in the Hawaiian Custom House ?
Were they allowed to come in free Mr.. Carter says
duties are not levied upon British produce or goods.
What, then, is the meaning Of the ~ Article of the
Treaty of 1851, which provides that No other or
higher duties shall be imposed on the importation
into the Hawaiian Islands Of any article the growth,
produce or manufacture Of Her Britannia Majesty's
dominions than are or shall be payable on the like
article, being the growth, produce or manufacture
| ofany other foreign country?' Have British goods
never paid duty since the ratification OF that treaty I?
The argument is absurd; II IS a piece OF special
pleading that will not stand; it is too transparent,
too shallow. to take in the British Government. If
duties are levied upon certain goods or classes OF
goods, British goods are not exempted. but are in
cluded in those classes, and have paid duties like all
others.
In the same letter Mr.. Carter says: Ellis Ma
iesty's Government cannot concede that the abroga-
ton of the w, V and VI Articles can change the
aspects Of the question now under consideration, or
that any necessity exists for such abrOgatlon 10 JUS
tifv its present position.' But since this sentence
was written the Hawaiian Government has given
notice, and so yielded the point. Ii their view was
right, why not adhere TO it? But no, 1t was evident
by the terms of the treaty itself that before they
could liberate themselves from its action they must
denounce those articles that pressed, and denounce
them they did; and did they think that after de-
aouncing the treaty they could retain the duties that
had been paid under protest by British importers?
Chs course put him in mind of the man who, when
sending his son into the world, gave him this advice:
. Ms son, get money; honestly if you can, but get
it."
Mr.. Garter further says: Remembering with
pleasure the different occasions when you have
labored 20 prevent any misunderstanding on the
part of yoEr Government Of the real desires and
purposes of this Government. i with the more con-
fdence rely on your good offices IN removing any
wrong impression which Her Majesty's Govern
ment may have received OF the effect OF any action
Of His Majesty's Government upon the British
interests in your charge, and that you may become
more fully aware OF she good intents and pur-
poses of this Government, and also that His Ma
jesty's Government may more clearly understand
the causes which led to your note, and the treaty
obligations to which you refer"
These are very smooth and pleasant sentences;
indeed, all the sentiments and professions Of friend
ship throughout Mr.. Carter's letter and the report
of the Committed are pleasant to eye and ear, but
al sInv L. nnf agV upaan 20 ntIaVp naVa
unguarded utterances. Their real value is APP
parent from the terms Of a letter from Mr.. Carter
to the King. which has been disentOmbed by the
Majority Committee. 1t IS dated from London,
October Is. 1877. and in it occurs the sentence:
We thought we had reached a ready solution in
the withdrawal OF the 4h Article OF the British
Treaty by mutual consent on my agreement not to
raise duties on certain articles above 10 per cent:
but when we came to discuss the wording, / insis-
ted on the expression that the article should not
be invoked in favor of any drawbacks or free entry
of British goods in the past, and told them that we
did not propose 10 pay back any OF the duties
which had been paid under protest: and that if that
point could not be covered. | would make no
promises for the future, as if we were ever 10 be
asked to refund we should refuse, and il compelled
so TO do we should use our undonbted right, after
the expiration of the years notice, to put such a
tariff on British goods as would make them repay
us tenfOld."
Now there is no m~istaking this. 1t clearly indi-
Gates the value OF ali professions of friendship
made by Mr.. Carter and the Government whose
he had. But it reveals more, for no
man of Mr.. Carriers information and experience
could have penned such an article believing i'm
plicitly what he intended to convey. Any man Of
common sense must know that by imposing heavy
on goods OF one nationality, he might pre-
vent their importation from that country, but that
ne could not raise revenue from them while the
;ame description of goods was imported duty free
rom other markets. Could any one be so foolish ]
Is to believe that, although no threats were made,
he hollowness OF the representations was not seen
Is there no unfriendly spirit in that eX-
On the contrary, is it not apparent in ;
very line? -
.Gorts Mr.. C%arter's) have been unsuccessful in a
,ersuading Her Majesty's Secretary Of State TO ac- E
the construction held by His Majesty's Gov a
and clearly set forth in the Miller-Wyllie
etter of March 2Sth. 1855. written by authority Of j
ord Clarendon. then Secretary Of State for For /
ign Affairs" And further on, &" but he (Lord =
)erby) declined to give any guaranty or promise
hat no claim would be made for return Of duties a.,
n British goods imported previous to July 3, :
S7S." '
What has since been done by the late or present
Government. or what is proposed TO be done, the I
minority Committee has not informed the Assem- ii
lv; but we learn from the report Of Mr.. Carter 10
lr. PIERCE. made since the minority report, that II
Salisbury, while expressing bis regret at the 4
Of the mission, informed him that Her =
laiesty's Government fully shared in bis hope that /
be termination Of any part Of the Treaty Of 1851 ,
night not in any way interfere with the relations =
{ friendship happily subsisting between Great .
and the Hawaiian Islands. D
Here we are. Mr.. Chairman. face 10 face with the a
,ritish Goyernment-directly at issue with il. and L
Though no threat has been made, that Govern
rnment has unmistakably given us 10 understand n
3 views, for, according 10 the Committee, " on 4
be % of April last Mr.. WodehOnse delivered TO /
be Minister Of Foreign Affairs a memorandum :
the following terms: Her Majesty's Commits .
Toner and COnsulGenera has been Instructed 10 u
to His Excellency II. a. Peirce. His Hawaiian u
iajesty's Minister Of Foreign Affairs, that Her
Iajesty's Government cannot admit the right of &
De Hawaiian Government 20 terminate the opera
Of the provisions of Article " Of the Anglo
Hawaiian Treaty Of 1851 until the expiration Of Il
ne twelve months notice which they have given. o.
While it remains in force, Her Majesty's Govern
must require that it shall be faithfully OBJ =,
eryed, and consequently that duties improperly :,
.vied shall be repaid" There are other points y
lade by the British Government, but at the pres -
Mt time / shall pass them by. But there is no -.
listaking the meaning of that communication. u
Further on the Committee states: " In the 1rst VI
lstanee. duties are paid by merchants or other in. ,
and not by or for account Of any Gov g
rnment: and as in trade the duty f. added to the d
ost of the goods, the duties are finally paid TO a al