St. Landry clarion. (Opelousas, La.) 1890-1921, 1897-07-31
SECRETARY sHEKMAN SHIFTS.
Some Significant Signs An the Hawaii
ian Plot.


ian Plot.
Secretary Sherman's 3 friends will have
harder work defending his complete
change of opinion embodied in the sig
nature of the Hawaiian treaty of an
ncxation 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-
ton 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 necessities
or circumstances arise to force them to
a change of course and the adoption of
new lines of policy. In politics, as in
war, the clash of forces continually
correction of plans to meet them. But
this plea cannot be urged in behalf of
Mr.. 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 Mr.. Sherman ar
rived in the calm reflection of his old
age.
Arguments advanced in favor of the
annexation of the islands are remarka
Bile chiefly for their fimsiness. 1t is
urged that it is necessary to annex Ha
waii to prevent the seizure or oppres-
sion of the little country by another ma
ton. What absurdityi We were not
compelled to annex Venezuela in order
to prevent England from selling 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 protectorate or the annexa-
tion of the territory. We can assure
them self-governmenti in peace without
assuming any of the responsibilities of
government or departing a hairbreadth
from the safe and sound policy of avoid
ing territorial extension or foreign er1-
tanglements. We have only to announce
the policy to have it respected by the
nations OF the civilized world.
BY implication Mr.. Sherman clearly
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
q fresh debt, new and distant terri
tory to defend and the responsibility
for the government of a mongrel peo-
pie with most undesirable elements.
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
siop of Hawaii want to shift their polit-
ica1 troubles and the guardianship of
their property to the shoulders of the
United States. We are. asked totaban-
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,