The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1892-11-24
An Open Letter to Mr.. Theo. H.
Davies,

Davies.
Ny DEAR SIR: In the interests
of a clearer and more definite state
ment of your views as to what
should be done to relieve the pres
ent depression, permit me to call
your attention to a certain vague
ness in your recently published
letters that may have been unin-
territorial. For instance, you say
in the ADVERTISER of the 18th
inst, II am convinced that we
could pursue policy Of CONNER
cial progress which would secure
for the Hawaiian Kingdom the
respect of the world, and the espe-
cial favor of the United States"
You will recall that you said this
in connection with another remark
that "there has been no crash in
sugar, and (we) are suffering mere
ly from the extension by the United
States of the free trade principle to
other countries besides ourselves"
In your communication to the AID
vERTIsER of the 22d inst, you again
state "that what Mr.. Hartwell, Mr..
Emmeluth and the rest of us want,
is not free trade, but a large pro-
tected market, such as we have for
rice, have had for sugar, and de-
sire to have for fruits and other
products"
[ gather from these statements
(a) That you have in mind a
policy of commercial progress that
would greatly benefit the islands at
this juncture.
(b) That this policy is quite dis
tinct from and unlike anything
that has thus far been considered
by the thoughtful men of the king
dom.
(c) That this policy is a species
of protection, as opposed to a policy
of free trade with the United
States.
Would it not be specially oppor-
tune for you to briefly indicate the
salient features of this policy of
commercial progress? Would it
not be we'll to state rather more
fully what you mean by ga large
protected market?" Most of us had
become convinced that there was
but one way open to profitable
production on the islands, and
that that lay in free trade treaty
whereby Hawaii should receive
special concessions from the United
States not granted to other coun-
tries. But we recognize that there
must be some other way of accom-
plishing what we are after, mas
much as you say that it is not free
trade that we want, but large
protected market. Where are we
to look for that protected market?
What is incumbent on us in order
to secure such a protected market?
It seems beside the mark to
imagine that you refer to the Uni
ted States, inasmuch as it is mani
testify absurd to look for any
legislation from a Democratic adj
ministration in the direction of
raising the tariff; for instance, on
canned goods. operative as to all
importations from countries other
than Hawaii. The United States
is "the protected market we have for
rice, and have had for sugar." but
it is unfortunately a protected mar
ket for canned goods, that leaves us
out in the cold. If you mean by
a large protected market that the
United States be induced to ex-
empt from duty all Hawaiian pro-
ducts entering her ports, it would
appear that your policy is identi-
cal with the one you have been
criticizing. I cannot bring my
self to believe, however, that a
gentleman of your business acu-
men, who has so manifestly profit
ed by enterprises during the flour
ishing period of the cane industry,
could permit himself in the present
grave situation to multiply words
without knowledge" 1 prefer to
conclude that you have in mind "a
policy of commercial prosperity
that is unique, in that it has oc-
Cured to no one else, being in fact
"a large protected market" some
where in the world, "such as we
now have for rice" And | further
conclude that you will not keep q
curious public waiting long to Learn
what this unique and propitiou:
policy can be.
remain, my dear sir,
Yours respectfully,