The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1886-05-17

RECIPROCITY TREATY.
His Fxcellency Mr. Gibson said he de-
sired to make a statement for the informa-
ton of the Assembly 1t was in accord
ance with a request for information by q
! resolution of the House that had been
! already formally answered. The resolu-
/ ton had reference TO alleged discussions
/ in Washington about the cession Of Pearl
! Harbor to the United States Government.
He had read that morning in newspaper
an alleged treaty providing for theexclu
! sive right of Pearl Harber to the United
1 States. 1t was signed Fred e. Freling-
! huysen and H. A. P Carter. He had TO
| say it was pure invention of falsehood.
| By command of His Majesty he had the
| honor to lay before the Assembly the fol-
/ lowing dispatch:
'HAwAIIAN LEGATION,
"WAsHINGToN, d. C, April p, 1886.
..SIR-In my dispatch No. 1O1 Of March
Is. 1885, I explained to you all that1 then
knew of the origin of the Pearl River
movement in the Senate. The Senator
who, on his return from San Francisco,
was so insistant upon raising the question,
was constantly defeated in the Senate
Committee, but it would appear that he
recently obtained permission to make his
proposition to the Senate in secret session.
What the exact terms of the proposal are
I have not ascertained. So much has re-
Gently been said about the facility with
which information concerning secret ses-
sions was obtained that Senators are very
reticent and one cannot believe what the
newspapers report concerning them.
Il have, however, made point TO see
several of our friends and say to them that
hoped no amendments regarding a ces-
sion of any harbor or territory would pass,
as it would not be consented to by the
King, and that l would prefer to let the
new treaty be defeated than to pass with
such an amendment.
IF I am correct regarding the amend
ment it will have to be voted on first, and
can be carried BY bare majority, and
then the treaty thus amended has to
receive a two-thirds vote. 1 hope the
| amendment may be defeated.
mo word had ever passed between Mr..
Bayard and 1 regarding cession of Pearl
River till the other day, when l called on
him to say that l had seen it reported that
such proposal was being discussed, and
hoped it would be defeated in the Senate
He replied that no intimation had reached
him of such proposition, and that he was
opposed to any amendments whatever.
but we had better wait till the Senate made
some communication to him, when he
would let me know and consult me.
Il repeatedly said to members of the
committee that no cession would be con-
H,,E 7 fold hat
had been informed that it would be,
Where he received such an assurance do
not know. L am of opinion that if such
proposition is made it will not reach US
officially, but be returned by Mr.. Bayard
flor the President) to the Senate with the
information that the President does not
approve of it. Under this conviction do
not think we need to have any anxiety
about the matter.
with highest regard, l am, sir, your
Excellency's most obedient and humble
servant, H. A. p. CARTER.
"His Excellency w. NJ. Gibson, Minister
of Foreign Affairs"
His Excellency also read the following
dispatch, dated Washington, D. c., May
18th, which he had received that morning
from His Majesty's Envoy Hon. H. A. P.
Carter: "Bayard authorizes me to say
that alleged amendments to treaty in Sen
ate wholly without knowledge or concur
renee by him. Trust no notice will be
taken in Honolulu. Think treaty can be
maintained intact with care and pru-
dence."
His Excellency submitted to the House
the original convention signed by Fred. T.
Frelinghuysen and Henry A. P. Carter,
and which awaits the ratification of the
Senate. 1t is printed in English in the re-
port of the Department of Foreign Affairs, !
but not in Hawaiian. He had had it trans |
lated into Hawaiian, and would ask the
interpreter to read it. This was done. |
Thus the Assembly will learn that the new
treaty negotiated by His Majesty's Envoy |
embodies nothing but continuance of the
old treaty, without any modification what |
ever. The treaty as published in San
Francisco paper is a forgery. There is
some resemblance, as the same date Is
given in the bogus as in the genuine one.
He would now refer to letter from His
Majesty's Envoy to the Minister of For
eign Affairs. 1t would take up too much
time to read it through, but the following
extract would be sufficient: