The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1893-10-28

Inc proposal of a reference OF the |
annexation question to the residents |
OF the Islands, as preliminary to fur |
ther negotiations, would indicate that |
IN MT Cleveland's views annexation
Is constitutional, not unconstitutional.
III 1t were beyond the constitutional
power OF this government TO assume
control over these outlying islands OF
the sea, there would be no occasion
Tor plebiscite to ascertain whether 4
majority of the Hawaiians want TO be
annexed or protected. This point
needs no calculation. 1t is obvious
that II Mr.. Cleveland's policy il as re-
ported, the president shares the Suns
opinion that annexation is constitu-
tional, and rejects the elaborate argu-
nents OF Judge Cooley and the other
expounders OF the organic law who
nave been laboring TO convince him
that the annexation of Hawaii Is not
constitutional.
The proposed reference OF the cues
ton to the whole body OF Hawaii's in
habitants would likewise signify that
in Mr.. Cleveland's view annexation,
or form OF American protectorate, is
not iDtrinsically and necessarily I'M
desirable. IL it were folly, in his
opinion, for us to acquire the islands
under any circumstances, he would
never propose that the people of
the islands be required to decide
whether the islands shall be taken
IN under the American flag. Mr.
Cleveland is altogether too serious
minded a statesman to indulge in such
trif1ing. Therefore, if the reports of
his Intentions are in the main accu-
rate, we take it for granted that he
shares our opinion on the general
| question OF the desirability of acquir-
ing Hawaii, rather than the opinion
| of those who advise him that the
islands are not worth having.
Thus far all is clear enough. When
We come TO the practical working of n
plebiscite INSTITUTED in Hawaii at
| the instance OF our government, some
difficult questions arise. The Pro-
visional government, the only exist
ing authority in Hawaii, wants an
nexation. 1t has said so. 1t has
| already applied for annexation. The
only purpose of such q plebiscite as
Mr.. Blount and Mr.. Cleveland are
said to desire, would be to pass the
| question over the head OF the existing
| government to the population of
| Hawaii, in order to ascertain whether
the Provisional government repre-
| sents a majority of the residents of
| Hawaii, native and foreign born. The
| Provisional government would be
| itself on trial at the election held to
| determine this question. Now, under
| the control of what authority would
| the plebiscite be held? Who would
| determine the qualifications of voters"
| Who would say, for example, whether
Japanese and Chinese coolies resident
| in Hawaii should have the right to
vote equally with the native Hawa-
| iians and the solid foreign-born resi-
dents and taxpayers of the country?
! Who would prescribe the electoral
regulations? Who would be in au-
thority at the polls? AS there is TO
be no foreign interference under any
| circumstances, the supreme power in
defining the suffrage and supervising
| the election must either rest with the
present Provisional government,
already committed to annexation and
| itself on trial, or with the government
! of the United States, directly or indi-
| rectly. If our government makes a
| favorable vote by plebiscite condi-
| ton of further negotiations for annex
alton, will it not inevitably be COM
PEELED by the logic of its attitude, to
prescribe the conditions under which
| the plebIscite is held?
In that event we should witness an
extraordinary and perpleXing spec
tacle. We should behold the federal
government of the United States,
which has not the constitutional
power to regulate state elections even
here at home, regulating and super
| Vising an election in foreign state,
an independent country in diplom-
| attic relations with us, q sovereign
member of the worlds family of ma
| tions! If the reported programme is
carried out to the extent of sending
an imposing fleet of American war
vessels "to guarantee n peaceful and
fair election in Hawaii, we should
behold the government of the United
| States not only regulating foreign
election, but actually on guard over
the Hawaiian polls with bayonets
and gunpowder, The whole history OF
federal Interference with local eiec-
tions here at home contains no incl
dent approaching this in its sensa-
tional novelty and its bewildering in
version of accepted principles.
We beg leave to call attention 10
| the fact that this is the true meaning
of the project credited to Mr.. Blounts
| genius, and now attributed rightly or
wrongly, to Mr.. Cleveland. However
federal interference at the Hawaiian
polls may be disguised in the Ian
guage of diplomacy, it will be federal
interference at the Hawaiian polls
none the less, if there is the slightest
attempt on the part of our govern
ment to prescribe the conditions IN
der which the plebiscite is held.
We conclude, then, that the pro-
| posed plebiscite will be conducted,
not by the United States, but by the
Provisional government of Hawaii
/ New York Sun, October eth.