The morning call., 1893-04-15
THE FLAG HAULED DOWN.

An act of craftsmanship should be con-
sidered from its practical point of view.
What IS likely to result from i.P What is
the alternative OF the policy repudiated?
VIII the act under consideration in any way
facilitate the accomp plishment of a desired
purpose? The hauling down OF the Ameri-
can flag at Hawaii Is, from political point
Of view. humlliating. But we may reconcile
ourselves to it if we can see how good may
result from it. If the good cannot be made
clear the act Will be condemned. There is a
limit to the forbearanee extended an admin
istration on the score of good intentions
The ruling power is expected not only to
mean well but to do we'll
II is stated at the islands that Mr. Blount
will not permit any foreign interference
with the government of the islands. The
United States thus takes the singular POSI-
tion of the proverbial dog in the manger.
It Iefrains from eating. and insists that
others shall also refrain. This position is
much more perilous than possession of the
islands would be. Foreign Governments
that would recognize the right Of the United
States to take possession of the islands on
the ground of military necessity will not
stand Dy while the United States asserts no
right Of possession that does not belong to
any other nation. 1t is admitted that the
Hawaiian Islands cannot maintain an inde-
pendent government. They must lean upon
some stronger power, and their inclination
is to lean this way. But the United States
declines TO support them and at the same
time declares that they shah not look for
support in any other direction. The sub
mission of the question to the people is
sham. The United States will not bind
itself to submit to the decision of the
people. The geographical situation of the
islands forbids it. If Ireland were three
thousand miles from England there
would be no objection to the Independence
of Ireland. But with Ireland at England's
door there is no party openly fayOring
independence. So with the Hawaiian ISL
ands Ii they were located on the Asiatic
side Of the Pacific Ocean it would be no
particular business of ours which stronger
nation they might turn to. But located
where they are, within a few days sail of
the Pacifc-American ports, the people Of
the United States are nearly unanimous in
tie opinion that they should not be allowed
to pass under the control of great military
and naval power. Taking the necessities
of the case in view, 1t is not easy to reconcile
the course of the administration with the
broad American policy which all recent
administrations have considered necessary
to our safety. Why do we say that Eng
land, France or Germany shall not possess
Cuba? Because the possession of Cuba by
great naval power would greatly facilitate
the landing of hostile army in the United
States. More than fifty years ago we
declared our readiness to fight to prevent
American outposts from falling into hostile
hands Does Mr.. Cleveland propose to
retreat from this position? Does he imag-
inc that he can recede from the Monroe
doctrine and give the PEOPLE in its place
some kind of Cleveland doctrinef It is
more likely that he has not followed out
his new course to its logical end. BE has
been pretty busy putting Democrats in the
places occupied by Republicans and has
perhaps not given much thought to broader
lines of policy