The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1893-07-05
LIGHT ON THE HAWAIIAN
QUESTION is ALASKA OURS
OR RUSSIAS TODAY

article has attracted much attention,
and very justly. With persuasive
reasoning in precise and elegant Ian
guage, this distinguished professor Of
constitutional law points out what he
regards as grave obstacles to the acqui-
sition of the islands.
We observe that Judge Cooley's
presentation of the constitutional as
poets of the question has brought not
a little comfort to the thlck-and-th
opponents of American extension.
They find this publication most OPP
perfume. 1t will be remembered that
when annexation was first proposed by
Hawaii, such opposition as was then
developed rested almost exclusively
on the charge that the whole business
was mercenary enterprise of Claus
Spreckels and the sugar planting in
terests, which hoped to work annexation
for their own pecuniary profit. When
Mr.. Spreckels turned out to be the
bitterest enemy of annexation, the
ground was promptly shifted. The
anti -annexationists fell back on the
position that President Dole's Govern
ment did not represent Hawaiian
opinion, but owed its existence, original
and continued, solely to the circum-
stance that Minister Stevens had i'm
properly hoisted the American flag
on the islands, and had called ashore
the BVston's marines. Then Mr.
Cleveland, wisely on the whole, as we
think, although by a somewhat I'M
usual if not questionable method of
procedure, abolished the temporary
protectorate which Gen. Harrison had
already repudiated; but the Provisional
Government did not collapse, as ex
pected Instead of falling to pieces it
stood firmer than ever, to the disap-
pointment of the obstructionists here at
home; while on the Islands the an
nexation sentiment kept steadily on,
gathering diameter like a rolling snow
ball.
That is why the anti-anneXationists
now hail SO gladly Judge Cooleys at
tempt to prove that the United States
Government has no constitutional
power to annex these Islands, and that
there is no precedent for such pro
ceeding. If the project is unconsttu
tional and without precedent, that
ends the whole business. We need not
say that every American citizen worthy
of the franchise entyrtains the highest
respect for the Constitution and he
will never advocate, except under pres
sure of supreme national necessity, any
proceeding which manifeStly violates
the provisions of that revered instru-
ment. When Judge Cooley has once
demonstrated the unconstitutionality
of Hawaiian annexation, he has proved
his case and rendered annexation i'm
possible. He need not waste single
word on the question of expedienCy, or
on the question of desrability Of &C.
QUESTION, or probable consequences, q
on any other branch of the subject
For this reason we attach the greatest
importance to the article in the Forum
against annexation. Coming from SC
learned and eminent an eXpounder Of
constitutional law, the argument is en-
titled to the most careful and respectful
examination and in the most respect
full manner possible we shall endeavol
to show that there are holes in il
through which You might pitchfork moi
only Hawaii and Maui and Kauai anC
Oahu and the minor members of the
Sandwich group, but also any and al
Of the little islands of the seas.
Before considering the several in
stances in American history since thu
adoption of the Constitution where GU
Government has effected an increase o
its territory, Judge Cooley takes pain
to establish the fact that this latest cas-,
of proposed territorial increase concern
not any mere possession or appanagt
of foreign power, but an Independent
country peer and equal in the soc'et
of nations. "The question Of power t.
annex Hawaii" he says, sis precisel
the same that it would be if it wer
proposed to annex any other lndepsr
dent country in the world to the Unite'
States; Russia, for instance, or France.
Quite true; and whenever Russia O
France applies for admission to tn
United States, and public opinion i
this country regards the admission {
Russia or France as desirable, it wi
be high time to discuss that partcula
question on its merits. But it may b
remarked in passing that the sam
"grave obstacle" would be encountere
in the case of Canada, should Ii
Dominion, after the separation frol
Great Britain, seek admission as a
independent power to the America
republic When that inevitable d;
comes, with public sentiment on bot
sides of the border demanding unio
we venture to prophesy that neith
Judge Cooley nor any other diSti
guished constitutional lawyer will di
cover in the circumstance of Canada