The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1894-03-19

1899 Hawaii was passing IhiouSH |
severe ordeal OF trial winch WI
conducted by the people VINO az n.-
tt,ay,,seIves ON the side of the Queen
md those who were organized III OPP
10 her revolutionary puI-
1oees The Queen seems 10 nave
abandoned the controversy into the
Londs of the people, and made no I
effort 10 suppress the meeting OF Ihe
citizens opposed To her Revolutionary
DrOceedings by calling out her troops
10 disperse the meeting or 10 arrest iCs
leaders. Both the meetings we're quieI
and orderly, but the meeting al the
arsenal was intensely earnest, ana men
we're heard to express their Opinions
freely aud without interruption al polh
meetings. and they came 10 thelr resp
Iutions without disturbance Nheh
tbese meetings dispersed, the Queens
effort TO reject the constitution Oh 1881
had been approved by the one meet
inp held on the palace GROUNDS anu anu
composed almost entirely Oh hitIIse
Kanakas; the other meeting nad re
solved to- establish a proVlsIonal s"t
eminent. and formed committee 10
proceed with its organization. Inc
Oueen. though thus strongly endorseu
~ her native-born subjects, as she
calls them, did not venture any arrests
of the alleged revolutionists, out eHl-
IDENTIFY conscious that the reVoiuIioh
which she had endeavored to set on
foot had failed of efficient support
she did not use her troops or the po-
lice or any other power In the ulIec-
ton Of asserting her royal auIhoriSy
The meeting OF the people at the
arsenal was followed by organization,
the arming of the citizens, the Strong
arrav of forces, and Determined
shirt of success which has mateflai-
;Ied into an established government
that has continued to exist for more
than a wear, practically without any
onnositfon in Hawaii, and Win the
recognition of many great powers, IN
Guiding the United states. Ihese
events show, beyond reasohaoie uia
Dute. the acceptance by the people OF
Hawaii of the judgment and determl,
nation of the meeting at the arsenai
that the Queen had abdicated, that
her authority had departed, that she
and her ministers had submitted 10
the inevitable, and that they retained
no longer any substantial ground OF
hone or expectation that the queen
would be restored to her former ONCE.
The question whether such STATE
of affairs as is shown by the undlspuI-
ed facts i'm this case constitute an az
dication and created an interregnum
was passed upon in England Win
more care, because of the serious re
suits that followed the decision, than
seems to have been bestowed upon
like controversy in any other couh-
try. Du;.o,n boye
MANY liberties that are f1rmly eStap-
lished in the traditions of that coun-
try, and on many occasions they nave
asserted their rights. as the basis .
with GREAT deter
mination and success. In 1000, Whel
LANES III was on the throne, his severe
Conduct. exercised through the judi
ciary of the Kingdom and IN othel
wavs. and a strong adhesion 10 the
Catholic religion, caused the people
Great Britain to accuse him OF an III
tention to violate their unWrltteh con
stitution. He was great ana power
full king, and had accomplished yer.
much for the glory and honor OF Eng
land. But the people or EnSlahu nel'
him to AN observance of the spirit o
his oath of loyalty to TN - CONSTITUTION
of that country, and, when they De
came satisfied that he had made al
effort to subvert it, they in their Far
lament passed upon the question
his abdication and held that MS incen
tior. and effort to- violate the constltu
ton robbed him of his ute 10 IN
crown and opened the door TO Ia
establishment of new dynasty
Blackstone, in speaking vi Ine9
events, says:
HKinp lanes III succeeded TO IN
throne of his ancestors, and migh
have enjoyed it during the remalnde
of his life but for his own infatuate
conduct which, with other concurrln
circumstances, brought on the reVol'
ton in 1858.
ssrhe true ground and principle vi
on which that memorable event pr.
ceaded was an entirely new case
notifies. which had never before ha
pened in our history-the abdlcatlo
of the reigning monarch ana III
vacancy of the throne thereupon.
was not defeasance OF the right
succession and n new limitation OF u
crown by the King and both Hous
of Parliament; it was the act OF II
nation alone upon the conviction TN
there was no king in being. For, III
full assembly of the lords and con
mons. met in convention upon u
supposition of this vacancy, DO
houses came to this resolution: 'Th
King James III, having endeavored
subyert the constitution of the Kin
dom by breaking the original contra
between King and people; and,
the advice of Jesuits and other wick
persons, having violated the fund
mental law and having Withdraw
himself out of this Kingdom has a
Dictated the Government, ana that I
throne is hereby vacant"
Proceeding further, this emlne
jurIst says:
''For whenever a question arises {
tween the society at large and a
magistrate vested with powers orii
nally delegated by that society it mt
be decided by the voice of the socie
itself; there is not upon earth a
other tribunal to resort to. And II
these consequences were fairly deduC
from these facts our ancestors hS
soIemnly determined in full parl
mentary convention representing
whole society"
Further quoting from Blacksto
he says:
''They held that this misconduct