The Hawaiian gazette., 1893-12-26
ARBITRATION HAS NOT BEEN PRO-
POSED.

given in our issue of Thursday
there is little room to doubt that
the report as published is substan'
tally correct, as far as given. a;
we understand it, Mr.. Cleveland
refuses absolutely to consider the
question of annexation or protec'
ton in any form, but demands
only the restoration of the mon
archy, on the false assumption that
it was abrogated by the assistance
of the American Minister and
American troops.
He furthermore claims that the
question of the legality of the
existence of the Provisional Gov.
ernment, and the right of the ex-
queen to be restored have been re.
ferred to him for arbitration, and
that having considered the case he
has decided in favor of the ex-
queen. This matter, however, has
never been referred to the Presi-
dent by this Government, either
formally or informally, for arbi-
tration, at no time and in no man
ner whatsoever, and until some
proof of it can be produced, it can
only be called by its right name,
false statement.
AS this question of alleged arbi-
tration was ably discussed by Mr..
Hatch, in his address at the public
meeting held in this city on the
25th of November, we cannot do
better than reproduce it in full, as
it covers the whole ground, and
leaves nothing farther to be said:
ADDRESS OF F. NJ. HATCH, ESQ.
Fellow citizens: You have been in
vited to meet tonight to consider our
present political situation. We are
confronted by the declaration of Sec
retary Gresham that royalty must
be restored and our Government de-
stroyed. A kind providence has given
US this opportunity to be heard before
final action will be taken upon this
issue. At present we are proceeding
merely upon the newspaper reports
which have been received here and
which certainly we have a right to
discuss. We do not know what action
will be taken nor whether it will be
taken by the President or by Con-
gress. Certainly any action taken
by the Congress of the United States
of America cannot be resisted by
anybody in this community. Let US
not be misunderstood or misrepre-
sented by hostile press; we do not
meet here tonight 10 defy the power
of the United States; that would be
absurd, gentlemen, nor to villify those
at present in charge of the Govern
ment Of the United States. But we
meet with the hope that our words
will be heard by Congress before ac-
tion is taken by that body.
There are certain features in the
letter of Mr.. Gresham to the Presi-
dent which show that he is proceed
ing upon false assumption. Let US
hope that the distinguished secretary
has been misinformed up to this date.
- q 1x- m rnnir,t
out the false assumptions and to chal-
lenge them. Now chief among those
false assumptions is the one which
seems to underlie the whole letter,
that there has been submitted to the
arbitration of the President of the
United States the question whether or
not we had right to establish a gov
ernment in this country. Gentle
men, 1 challenge that assumption.
The assumption is false in every
respect. Let me briefly point out
why. Two parties can make a
contract, but it requires the consent
of three to make valid arbitration;
that of the two parties in interest and
the arbitrator. The parties must
clearly define the subject matter of
the arbitration.
1t is absurd to contend that there
could be any arbitration by inference
or imputatiOn. First: Has there
been any issue framed; has the Pro-
visional Government submitted to
the decision of anybody its right to
exist? Not one word or one act can
be produced in support of that con-
tention. Gentlemen, from the nature
of things, a government which started
in revolution, though now the gov
ernment de jure as well as de facto,
could not submit the question of the
legality of its existence to any arbi-
tration because its right lay in its
might. Having satisfied our consci-
ences as to the justness of our cause,
we depend upon our might and are
answerable to no other power. l
brand as false the claim that we have
put in issue the question whether or
not we were proceeding legally or not
in overturning corrupt and rotten
monarchy.
Second: Has the President of the
United States up to this point pre-
tended to have been acting in judi
cial capacity? l say his acts do not
Justify that assumption. An arhitra-
tor or Judge would not interfere with
the existing status of the parties. The
President Of the United States, imme-
diately upon gaining his seat, lowered