The Forrest City times., 1897-07-09
SECRETARY SHERMAN SHIFTS
Some Significant Sign. in the Hawai-
 Ian Plot.

Ian Plot.
 Secretary Sherman's friends will have harder work defending his complete change of opinion embodied in the sig nature of the Hawaiian treaty of an- nexation than has been caused by any change he has made in the whole course of his shifty career.
 When the question of annexation came up in connection with the selec- tion of Sherman for the secretaryship of state the Republic quoted his ut terance in his volume of recollections, in which he declared that. if his life was prolonged he would do all he could to add to the strength and prosperity of the United States, but nothing to ex- tend its limits and add new dangers by the acquisition of foreign territory"
 It is urged in justification of changes of mind on the part of statesmen that new situations and political necessite 8 or circumstances arise to force them to change of course and the adoption of new lines of policy. In politics, as in war, the clash of forces continually changes the situation and compels the correction of plans to meet them. But this plea cannot be urged in behalf of MT. Sherman's present change. There is no change of situation in the case of Hawaii which cannot be met on the lines of our traditional policy and the principle laid down in the deliberate conclusion to which Mir. Sherman ar rived in the calm reflection of his old age.
 Arguments advanced in favor of the annexation of the islands are remarka- ble chiefly for their flimsiness. It is urged that it is necessary to annex Ha- waii to prevent the seizure or oppres- sion of the little country by another na- tion. What absurdity! We were not compelled to annex Venezuela in order to prevent England from seizing the territory or expressing that country. We assure the independence of every republic on this continent without a thought of annexation. We sustain the Monroe doctrine, and we can maintain the independence of Hawaii and protect her rights without the establishment of formal proteetorate or the annexa- tion of the territory. We can assure them self-government in peace without assuming any of the responsibilities of government or departing hairbreadth from the safe and sound policy of avoid ing territorial extension or foreign en- tanglements. We have only to announce the policy to have it respected by the nations of the civilized world.
 lG
 and strongly conveys the opinion that the extension of our limits is bad policy and tends to weaken the nation, and that new dangers would be involved in the acquisition of foreign territory. What compensation would we get for thus embarking in new and dangerous political enterprise in opposition to all our past tried policy? We would get fresh debt, a new and distant terri tory to defend and the responsibility for the government of mongrel peo- pie with most undesirable clements We get no material benefit not assured to us by treaty.
 The fact is that several thousand Americans have seized Hawaii and do not know what to do with it or how to let go. Some millions of American money are invested in Hawaiian prop erty and bonds and the men in posses sion of Hawaii want to shift their polit. ical troubles and the guardianship of their property to the shoulders of the United States. We are. asked to,aban- don the proved wisdom of the fathers to lift them out of hole, and we seem to be on the verge of yielding to the folly.-St. Louis Republic.