The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1894-03-27
CORRESPONDENCE.
Letters on the Labor Question and
Pearl Harb0r.


opinion of ex-senator Edmunds on
the time limit of the right of the
United States to use Pearl Harbor, as
granted by the Hawaiian Government
in the supplementary convention of
1887. AS i have no faith in the re-
porter's having secured, or even un-
derstood, Mr.. Edmonds' views on this
point, look upon the report as being
merely sensational, and at most, any
discussion of it as being just now
| merely tentative. j never heard in
Washington either Mr.. Edmunds or
any other Senator claim that the sup
Elementary convention was other
than an amendment TO the treaty of
1876, and as such subject to its limita-
tions The treaty of extension, as
negotiated by our able American
Minister, Mr. Carter, with the Execu-
tive of the United States, had no
article regarding Pearl Harbor, but it
did refer expressly to an extension
of the time limit of the treaty of 1875
to seven years. The Pearl Harbor
article was added by the Senate on
motion of ex-senator Edmunds.
1t contained no time limit, because
that limit was defined by other
articles of the treaty. If, perchance,
Mr.. Edmunds, who is one of the ablest
constitutional lawyers of the United
States, did at the time or does now
think that the Pearl Harbor article
carries with it no limit of time, the
Executive of the United States and
the Executive of Hawaii, before rati-
flying said supplementary convention,
had that special point made clear.
Secretary Bayard explained to Mr..
Carter that the Executive of the
United States did not claim perpetual
right through that article, and our
Secretary, Godfrey Brown, explained
to our Legislature that the King held
that the grant was limited.
In any future Interpretation of that
article of the supplementary conven-
ton, should occasion arise for it, L
think the mutual understanding of
the two high contracting parties, who
appended their signatures, will gov
ern, rather than what might have
be III the views or purposes of the Sen
ators when the Senate added the arti
Gle to the convention.
OF a piece with this sensational news
of Mr.. Edmunds is the news that the
Senate will be moved to request Mr..
Cleveland to give notice for the abro-
CATION of the treaty of 1875. Since the
tariff bill of 1890, when sugar was put
on the free list, Hawaii has been re-
mittiug, in round numbers, duty on
American impOrtatiOns to nearly
$500, 200, receiving in return some
SAC, 900 only in American duty on rice
and bananas, etc. Considering that
ha "a nraGanf QnfOrpQn -
rather jug handled in favor of the
United States, and that abrogation
would ieopardiZe if not destroy certain
advantages which the United States
now holds in these islands, L hardly
think Congress will advise notice of
abrogation just now.
MoTT-SMITH.
MR.. EDITOR I'm your issue of
March 23d / observe that 1 have an
assailant in your correspondent ~.
a. c." who seems to think my sched-
ule of wages, published in the ADvER-
TIsER of March 21st, too low for APP
plication to certain farming districts
in Kansas, Minnesota and Washing
ton. L fail TO recognize my facile
guise, and am wholly ignorant of his
knowledge of the questions upon
which he seeks issue; but according
him full benefit of the doubt, 1 am
constrained to say that if he intends
his figures shall represent the general
schedules of wages paid to plantation
laborers in the communities men,
toned, at the present time, his repre-
sensations are preposterous, his argu
ments absurd, ana he, himself, has
surely been a victim to a premium on
labor which the condition of his own
neighborhood has never and will not
guarantee. He says, "Fhe usual aver
age wages, by the year, has been SIS
per month and board, in Kansas and
Minnesota That is a startling pro-
position. i should finch from the
task of Substantiating it. Indeed, |
should repeat the assertion, giving
my informant full credit for it. Kan
sas, airy, rolling, blooming Kansas,
staggering under her burden of mort
Cages and profitless farming industry,
! paying each of her plowmen rOrty-five
! hard silver dollars and board for a
| months labor!
Five hundred and forty dollars per
| year, with "city" board; think of it,
| For the matter of fact, hundreds and
| thousands of farmers in Kansas and
| Minnesota, employing one to several
laborers, seldo n derive more than
| this as their years gross earnings; and
such absurd expenditures for labor
would drive the largest era Ichmen"
from the business Immediately, in SO
much as even present conditions, with
labor at a mean of about Sl3, fails tC
place the farming industry in Kansas
and Minnesota upon profitable basis.
In the free atmosphere of the United