Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1897-05-08
JUDGE HARTWELL'S BRIEF
TO FINANCE COMMIT
TEE OF UNITED STATES SENATE.
Rensons why the TarsT Bill sho"1d
Except Hawaiian Products
Now Free by Treaty.

Judge Hartwell, VINO returned
by the City of PekinG, while in
Washington addressed a brief to
the finance committee Of the Sen
ate, giving reasons why the tariff
bill should except flom duties
Hawaiian products now free by
treaty. The brief opens with an
answer to the statement made by
Henry Oxnard before the House
committee. MIR. Hartwell shows
that the treaty was made for poll
teal reasons, and supports this
allegation by quoting the fourth
article of the treaty itself. He
then goes on to demonstrate that
as early as 1873 the United States
made a vain effort to secure Pearl
Harbor. The offer made by Ha
waii was Withdrawn, largely owing
to the opposition OF English resi-
dents in Honolulu, and it became
80 evident that English interests
were likely to become predomin-
ant that there was no other way
to prevent Hawaii becoming de-
pendent upon some ether power
than by entering into this reci-
procity with the United States.
In 1884 the stipulation was made
that the United States Govern
ment should have exclusive right
to enter the harbor of Pearl river,
in the island of Oahu, and there
maintain a coaling and repair sta
ton for the use of the vessels of
the United States.
Judge Hartwell next proves by
the diplomatic correspondence
between Secretary Frelinghuysen
and Minister Carter that the Pearl
Harbor privilege granted to the
United States can only last as
long as the treaty. He discusses
the right of Congress to enact
tariff laws multiplying treaty stipu-
lations, and argues the immense
advantage of this treaty, in that it
prevents Hawaii from entering
into any other such treaty with
any other country, and this was
carried so far that the British
Government was denied the right
to rest cable upon one of its ISL
ands.
1t is intimated that the com.
mercial results of the treaty have
not been fairly presented by Mr..
Oxnsrd. Judge Hsrtwell points
out that in the very largest item of
all, Hawaii sugar, the consignors
invoiced at their fullest gross
value and not at their net value,
which would be % per cent less
than Mr.. Oxnard's figures. On
the other hand, he demonstrates
that American goods were not in
voiced at anything like their full
value, SO that 20 per cent should
be added to ascertain their actual
value. These two changes alone,
he claims, cut the balance of trade
against the United States $84,-
100000 to S44, O0O,O
Mr.. Hartwell proceeds to de-
monstrate the fact that the in.
terisland steam navigation trade
and the trade between San Fran.
cisco and Honolulu has greatly
increased, and has brought about
the construction of vessels which,
with a single exception, were
built in the United States. He
touches incidentally upon the fact
that fully one third of the entire
sugar output of the islands is
owned by American citizens re
siding in California, and contri-
buting from their sugar profits to
the expenses of the State and
Federal Government.
The closing paragraph OF Mr..
Hartwell's brief is significant.
He says:
"It is exceedingly fortunate that
the Sugar Trust has shown that
the interests of beet sugar are
identical with those of the Trust,
for this enables the people of the
United States as well as the
honorable Senate to understand
precisely the real reasons for
which the Hawaiian treaty is
sought to be abrogated. If this
result were obtained at the dicta-
ton of sugar trust it would be
plain to all men that the foreign
policy of the United States, as far
as it ever had foreign policy, is
dictated by the concentrated