The sun., 1893-03-13
Mr.. q. r. Iathrop Replies to the Criticisms
of Mr.. Dnvles.

To THE EDITOR OF THE SuS-Str: 1t does not
seem necessary to answer at much length Mr..
Theodore II. Daviess letter in The Sun OF
March 8. rerlying to nv article on Princess
kaiulani and the Hawaiian throne. published
In your Issue of March 81: for the reason that
his letter answers and defeats itself rs to the
main point at issue. Let me show briefly how
1t does so.
In the beginning Mr. Davies declares that
the monarchy in Hawaii Is as strictly heredi-
tary as is the English monarchy" II this be
true is it not singular that in 1854 Alexander
Liholibo. better known as Kan ehameha w.,
assembled the throne before his elder brother.
t uoti Is that tho hereditary order in the Eng
pointed by his predecessor. Kan ehane cha ILL.,,
vas the only other living Kamehameha. MIR.
monarch. the election is by the mobiles. But
the facts are that in one instance the election
their representatives how to cast vote for
fhem.,almost precisely as our people instruct
stanee the eeetio1 Was hed BY the
lature. including mobiles and popular repre-
uuIred BY the Con stitutlon Of 1864. 80 -
Hawaii has had several Constitutions. It
reSardns ths are SSn
eb5nfSS wth Is WHITTIER haiTlani has any
ing from the explicit statements in Mr. Da-
hf VIZ that has
the outset. that 1 am mistaken. When: how
sysr he coTss to Il TIE rsp point he writes s
be It remembered that one Of those sisters was
kaiulanis mother could have inherited the
Was not IN he SS OF their
kaiulani was in the collateral! line. But she
was ir0m her birth BY every enc
i nitlon IN "eI syery 9ns; sSen i it existed could
that Kaiulani's aunt KaIakaua's sister. r. !. e. e.
Liliuokalani., could not inherit the throne.
sAs not hs S h1Snf ss
bsyes bey niess to pH az It sati MI
was also barred What happened: then to
March March 3 lssl: she was, was 1aulY sppointed ara
History Of the Hawaiian People authorized
X hs goarf of IF the
Queen now deposed BY a revolution and the
setting up Of provisional Government, which
presumably everything in. the Constitution
apPppsrtia,inpE ri,i. to the monarchy. r.,,,:.
friends are here % to eontond end that the Prin,
cess Kaiulani is. not by royal line. but by con.
stitutional right. successor to the throne"
Thus. after contending that the monarchy is
hereditary. and after having sought to arouse
the sympathy OF the American people for
kaiulani by intimations that, she has
royal birthright," Mr. Davies abandons that
position completely. and confesses that he is
going to plead only an alleged constitutional
the subject OF allegation or Of pleading until
two years and two days ago. In SO doing he
answers himself and yindicates the correctness
OF my statement. This discussion. then. 80
far as am concerned. is closed.
=, II MIR. Davies wishes to argue constitu-
tiOnal right. recently declared under q Gov
ernment now overthrown. be should go to the
Department Of State at Washington. 1t is
equally clear that he ought not to have pre-
public under an entirely different guse: or to
have challenged their chivalry and support on
Q misleading implication or assumption that
kaiulani was a person Of hereditary royal
dignity. with claims by birthright or by
royal line" from which assumption he has
now been forced to retreat
GEoRGE PARSONS LATHRoP.
New LONDON. Conn. March II.