Los Angeles daily herald., 1889-10-22
The Hawaiian ..Protec.orate.


The proposed treaty submitted to the
United States by Mr.. Carter, the
Hawaiian Minister to Washington, has
excited the strongest opposition amongst
the natives of the Islands. There is
little probability that the treaty in its
present shape would receive the sanction
Of the United States. 1t proposes the
reciprocal admission of ali products and
manufactures of the two countries free
of duty in each. An exception is made
with reference to spirits. This is practic-
ally the effect Of the present treaty of
reciprocity. But the new feature OF the
proposed treaty is that the United
States shall guarantee the Independence
and individual autonomy of the
Hawaiian government against all attacks
upon it from without (and, presumably,
from within.) This article would place
the Islands under the absolute protec-
ton Of the United States, and would, in
effect, make it our duty to take inter-
ested cognizance of any and every un-
friendly act Of other nations against the
Kingdom of Hawaii.
Without any written treaty guarantee
of this character the United States could
not now look with unconcern upon any
movement on the part of any
European government to destroy the
autonomy of the Islands. If such
an attempt should be made this
country would, beyond question, inter-
fere; and it is not at all conceivable that
any power, in the face of our protest,
would attempt to absorb the Islands.
Therefore, the introduction of protect
crate article in treaty with the United
States would give the Islands no more
effective guarantee Of independence than
they now have. But such an article
would devolve upon our Government
immediate responsibilities which this
country, under its policy and traditions,
is not prepared to assume. If we should
guarantee the Independent autonomy Of
the Sandwich Islands, it would naturally
follow that we should be required to
place those islands in position of war.
like defense that would give practical
vitality to that guarantee.
This is not cons istent with our meth.
DDS. We have no annexation policy.
We are committed to the Monroe doc.
trine in the enlarged sense in which it
applies to this continent and to the
islands that are the natural outposts OF
this continent. Under the logical trend
and the fair construction of that doctrine
we would permit no European power to
seize the Hawaiian Islands. Our atti.
tude would be firm and immovable, and
in the face of that attitude no European
power would proceed to extremi-
ties without incurring war with
US. This would be inevita-
BILE, and therefore it is not likely
that any European power would rashly
set at naught our protest. In other
words, we may say that without an ex-
pressed article Of protection or guarantee
such as Mr.. Carter has incorporated in
his treaty, the United States now virtu-
ally exercise, and will continue to exer-
else, moral protectorate over the Ha.
waiian Islands.
1t was therefore unnecessary to place
the article which seems to have raised
the ire Of the natives in the treaty. We
have no desire to place troops Oil the
Islands, nor to gird them with cannon.
We have no annexation views upon
Kalakaua's territory, nor upon the terri
tory of any other king or people. Our
policy is to warn all other nations to
keep hands off, and that policy is the
best and only guarantee the Hawaiian
Islands can have of their independent
autonomy.