The sun., 1894-02-20

/. Prof. THBoDoRE 8. WooLsEY. professor Of
International law In the Yale Law School.
discusses the Hawaiian question In the
number of the Yaie Reeiep for the current
month. He points out that "in the eye OF
International law" the provisional charac-
ter OF the present Hawaiian Government
does not make II any the less sovereign
State. aid that even granting that Its ORR
gin was owing TO q wrongful act OF the
United States. its subsequent legality is
not impaired thereby.
Among Mr.. CLRvELAND's shifts 10 manu-
facture excuses for his Hawaiian policy. he
has pretended that because the Provisional
Government was merely established Ito
exist until terms Of union with the United
States Of America have been negotiated aud
agreed upon." It iapsed simply by reason
of his refusal TO consider the treaty Of
annexation. This fallacy Prof. wooLsKY
disposes OF very eHectually. He shows
that according to the rules OF inter-
national law. "if . Government is
organized to secure certain objects"
It Is not competent for any other than it.
self to decide whether those objects are
achieved or are impossible. or what other
objects shall succeed them" What this
Ia
whether IL shall withdraw in favor of the
dsposed Queen or form itself into Q per-
manent republic. Is q matter purely for
internal decision"
Prof wOoLsEY IL OF the opinion that the
hasty recognition" OF the Provisional Gov
ernment by Minister STEVENS was wrong;
but he denies that on that account its sov-
ereignty as an independent State Is In any
"a
France In our Revolutionary war was tech
nieally Illegal. was an act OF war but the
recognition OF the United States was
not thereby invalidated. Our recognition
OF Texan Independence was wrong, In
being likewise premature. but no one
questioned the legality OF the Texan status"
To show that the recognition OF proyi-
sional government Is no new thing he In
stances the case OF Costa RIea In 1868. the
recognition OF the National Defence Com
mittee as the Government OF France In 1870.
and the recognition OF the CALDERoS Gov
ernment in 1881 as the existing proyi-
sional government" OF Peru. mot only
our recognition OF the new Government In
Hawaii. not only Its recognition by other
States" he concludes. "but also every sub
ssqusnt act proves it's sovereignty. We
have accredited q Minister to 1t. We have
received Minister from It."
That being so. "our own usage and the
rules OF international law" require that
our attitude toward the Provisional Gov
srnment should be As toward q sovereign
State. Its rights are the same. our Tela-
tions to it are the same. AS IN the case OF Its
predecessor. To restore the Queen by in
teFysntion would DO . fresh wrong. Any
foreible interference In the Affairs Of Ha-
wall. even to insist on . pleblscits whose
result should determine in whose hands
the government shall reside. would be IL
legal. One wrong cannot be cured by an
other. Our duty Is ample. Il consists In
keeping our hands on"
Thus Prof. WOoLsKX brushes away the
eretexts and pretsnoes In Law and In morals
With which Mr.. CLEvKLARD and his euckoOs
In Congress have sought TO justify the In
famous policy toward Hawaii. Altar ae-
osptinE their improved and eontroverted
premise that the Queen was depossd by the
wrongful assistance OF Minister SFKVKEs. he
proves that the condemnation Of this assist
anes is . condemnation OF Mr.. CLEVELAND
likewise. The very offence which Mr.. CLEVE-
LAND charged against Mr.. SFEVKNs as :
moral snormity. he proceeded himself 10
eOmmit under the guiss OF sublime moral
IsfoFmsrl II Ii is now our simple duty 70
Eeep our hands on Hawaii. the same duty
nrbsde the inception Of the conspiracy IoF
the TsstoTStion OF the Queen. which AT.