The Bolivar bulletin. (Bolivar, Tenn.) 1888-1946, 1894-01-19

Lutte dominion OF the queen.
The law referred to BY the queen in Chapter
VI. Sec. 0, or the penal code, as follows: Who
ever shall commit the crime 81 treason, shall
suffer the punishment cf death: and all his
property shall be c6nhscakcd to the govern
nent." There are under this law no degrees
q treason. Plotting alone carries with Il the
need hardly add. in conclusion. that the
tension of feeling is so great that the prompt
est action Is necessary to prevent disastrous
consequences.
send a cipher telegram asking that Mr
Blouit's report he Withheld for the present.
and send with it a telegram not in cipher as
follows:
Views Of first party so extreme as 10 re-
quire further Instructions j am. etc,
ALBERT s WILLIS
Mr.. Dole's Reply to Minister Willis De-
mand for Surrender.
DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN Affairs,
HONOLULU. IL T.. Dec -. 1853.
SIR: Your excellency's communication OF
December 49, announcing the conclusion Flich
the president of the United States Of America
has hnqllT arrived at, respecting the appllca
ton OF this government for treaty of political
union with that country, and referring also to
the domestic affairs of these islands, has had
the consideration of the government.
While it is with deep disappointment that
we learn that the important proposition which
United States. and which was at first favor
ably considered by IL, has al length been re-
lected we have experienced a sense OF relief
that we are now favored with the first official
information upon the subject that has been re
eeived through period of over nine months.
Accept the Presidents Decision Against
Annexation.
While we ACCEPT the decision OF the presi-
dent OF the United States, declining further to
consider the annexation proposition, as the
final conclusion OF the present administrator,
we do not feel incline to regard it as the last
word Of the American government upon this
of the two countries. of American effort and
influence in building up the Christian
aided in giving this country an honorable place
among independent nations, the geographical
position of these islands and the important.
and to both countries, profitable, reciprocal
commercial interests. which have long existed.
together with our weakness as sovereign ma
tion, all point with convincing force to polit
zeal union between the two countries as the
necessary logical result from the circum-
stances mentioned. This conviction is
sion OF American statesmen over a long
period in favor of annexation, conspicuous
among whom are the names of w. L. Marcy,
William H. Seward, Hamilton Fish and James
@. Blaine, all former secretaries of state, and
especially so by the action of your last ad-
ministration In negotiating treaty Of annexa-
ton with this government and sending 1T to
the senate with view TO its ratification.
VIII Appeal to Futurs Administrations.
We shall, therefore, continue the project of
political union with the United States
as conspicuous feature of our foreign
later it win be crowned with success, to the
lasting benefit Of both countries. The addi-
tional portion of your communication referring
to our domestic affairs with view OF interior
ing therein is a new departure in the relations
OF the two governments. Your information
this government to promptly reltnqufsh
to her (meaning the ex-Queen), her con-
stltutional authority with the question:
Are you willing TO abide by the de-
cision of the presdentf" might well be
dismissed in q single word, but for the cir
cumstance that your communication contains
tn ma mis- at nd or.
roneons conclusions based thereon, that are so
prejudicial TO This government that l can not
permit them TO pass unchallenged. Moreover
the Importance and menacing character of
this proposition make it appropriate for me
to discuss somewhat fully the questions
raised by IL. We do not recognize the right of
the president OF the United States TO interfere
in our domestic affairs. Such right could be
conferred upon him by the act of this govern
ment, and by that alone, or it could be acquired
by conquest. This l understand TO be the
American doctrine conspicuously announced
from time to time by the authorities of your
government.
President jackson said in his message to
congress in 1885: THE uniform policy and
practice OF the United States is 10 avoid all
interference in disputes which mostly relate to
the internal government of other nations and
eventually to recognize the authority of the
prevailing party with reference to the merits OF
original controversy.
This principle of International law has been
consistently recognized during the whole past
Intercourse of the two countries, and was
Gently recontirmed in the instructions given
by Secretary Gresham to Commissioner
Blount of March II, 1893, and by the latter pub
1ished' In the newspapers in Honolulu in a
letter of his own to the Hawaiian public. The
words of these instructions which l refer to
are as follows
The United States Had No Right to In
terfere.
The United States claim no right to inter-
fere in the political or domestic affairs or in
the internal conflicts OF the Hawaiian islands
other than as herein stated referring to the
protection of American citizens), or for the
purpose Of maintaining any treaty or other
rights which they possess"
The treaties between the two countries con-
fer no right of interference. Upon what then,
Mr.. Minister, does the president OF the United
States base his right of interference? Your
communication is without information upon
this point, excepting such as may be contained
in the following brief and vague sentences:
she tthe ex-dueenl WAS advised and assured
by her ministers and leaders of the movement
for the overthrow of her government that if
she surrenderered under protest, her case
by the president of the United States
The queen finally yielded to the armed
Honolulu. relying on the good faith and honor
of the president when informed of what had
occurred, to undo the action OF the minister
and reinstate her and the authority which she
claims as the constitute ional sovereign OF
Hawaiian islands,"
Also, 1T becomes my further duty to advise
you, sir. the executive of the provisional gov
eminent, and your ministers, of the presi-
dents determination of the question which
your action ana that oil the queen deVOlVed
upon him, and that you are expected to prompt
ly relinquish TO her constitutional authority"
1 understand that the first quotation is re-
ferred to in the following words OF the second;
which your action and that of the queen de-
volved upon him tthe president OF the
United States; and that the president
has arrived at his conclusions from Commits
sioner Blount's report. We have had as vet
no opportunity of examining this document.
but from extracts published in the papers. and
for reasons set forth hereafter. we are not dis
posed to submit the fate OF Hawaii to its state
ments and conclusions.
AS matter of fact. no member OF the execu-
tive OF the provisional government has con-
ferred with the ex-queen, either verbally or
otherwise. from the time the new government
was proclaimed till now with the exception of
one or two notices which were sent to her by
myself In regard to her removal from the pal
ace and relating TO the guards which the gov
srnment first allowed her, and perhaps others
Of like nature. I infer that a conversation
which Mr.. Damon, a member OF the advisory
council. is reported by Mr.. 'Blount 10 nave mad |
with the ex-queen on January H. and which
has been quoted in the newspapers, is the basis |
Df this astounding claim of the president OF
he United States of his authority to adjudi- |
cate upon our right as government to exist.
Mr. Damon. on the occasion mentioned, was |
former government. which had been in confer |
snce with US. What Mr.. Damon said to the |
sx-queen he said on his individual authority,
md did not report the matter to US.
Mr.. Blount- report OF his remarks on that |
occasion furnishes this government its first in
formation OF the nature Of those remarks Ad- |
hitting for arguments sake, that the govern |
nent had authorized such assurances. what |
vas her case" that was afterwards to "be |
AIRY considered by the president of the United |
StateSs' Was 1t the question of her right to |
subvert the Hawaiian constitution and to pro- |
claim new one herself, or was il her claim TO /
De restored to the sovereignty, or was il her /
'lafm against the United States for the al /
eyed unwarrantable acts of Minister Ste |
7ens, or was il all these in the alternative; |
Who can say But III 1t had been all of these. |
lr any of them. 1t could not have been more |
,learIy and finally decided by the president Of /
he United States in favor OF the provisional /
han he