The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1897-07-04
JAPAN'S PROTEST.
AN EXHAUSTIVE ANSWER ~
SECRETARY SHERMAN.
Several Points Which the Japanese
Did Not Seem to Understand Are
Explained to Them.

New York, July "a special to the
Tribune from Washington gives the
full text of Secretary Sherman's an
swer to Japan's protest against the an
nexation of Hawaii by the United
States After quoting the grounds on
which Japan made its protest. the sec
rotary of state says:
This recital is of itself proof that
your government has misapprehended
the statements and assurances con-
tanned in my note and in its relation
to the treaty question involved, strong
ly suggests confusion between the
formal stipulations of treaties and the
vested rights which the subjects of one
country may acquire in another under
treaty or the law of the land.
The principle of law. whereby the
existing treaties Of a state cease upon
Its incorporation into another state is
well defined by Halleck, who says:
But the obligations of treaties.
even where some of their stipula tons
are in terms perpetual, expire in case
either OF the contracting parties loses
ITS existence as an independent state
40 NStSN 80 AAANCi NOuSlllullOn Is SO
changed as to render the treaty inap-
plicable to the new condition of
things Continuing, the secretary
SAYS:
The question concerns the absolute
union of TWO states whereby one ceases
to exist and become merged in the
body polite of the other The history
of Europe. of America of the whole
world, is full of examples, from remote
periods to our own days. where indie
pendent states have ceased TO be such
through constrained or voluntary alb
sorption by another with attendant ex-
tinction of their former treaties with
other states. 1t needs no stipulation in
formal annexation treaty to work
this result, for it attends defacto an
neXatfon however accomplished. The
forcible incorporation of Hanover into
the Prussian kingdom instantly de-
stroyed previous Hanovarian treaties.
The admission of Texas to statehood in
our Union by joint resolution extin-
guished the treaties of the independent
republic of Texas. The recent French
law declaring Madagascar TO be a col
ony of France ended the former treaty
of that kingdom. 1t is the fact, not the !
manner of absorption. that determines
treaties. 1t does not even follow that
the existing treaties Of the absorbing I
state extend to the acquired territory. /
The treaties of the German empire are
held not to apply TO the coded French /
provinces of Alsace and Lorraine
What the Hawaiian treaty and an
nexation proposes is the extension of |
the treaties of the United States TO [
the incorporated territory to replace /
the necessarily eXtinguished Hawaiian !
treaties in order that the guarantees of |
treaty rights to all may be unquestion-
able and continuous. To this end, the |
termination of the existing treaties of |
Hawaii is recited as a condition prece-
dent. The treaty of annexati ton does
not abrogate those instruments. 1t is
the fact of Hawaii's ceasing to exist as
an independent contract that extin-
guishes those contracts.
AS TO the vested rights, if any be es-
tablished in favor of japan and of
Japan subjects in Hawaii. the case is
different, and l repeat that there is
nothing in the proposed treaty preju-
dicial TO the rights OF Japan.
Treaties are terminable in a variety
Of ways; that of 1886 between Japan
and Hawaii, to which your protest is
supposed to relate, is denounceable by
either party on six months notice, but
its extension would no more eXtinguish
vested rights previously acquired un-
der its stiDulations. than the repeal of
L municipal law affects rights of prop
LAS to the point that the mainten-
ance of the status quo of Hawaii is es-
;ential to the good understanding of
he powers who have interests in the
Pacific ii is sufficient to remark that
is a fact, through three-quarters of a
century in which the constitution and
government of Hawaii and the COM
nerce of the islands with the world
nave undergone notable changes, the
me essential feature of the status quo
las been the predominant and para
mount influence of the United States
Upon the fortunes of the group, and
hat the union of that island territory
o the United States, often fore {
hadowed and at times taking tangible
hape. has been recognized as neces-
airy contingency, drawing nearer year
" year with the passage of events.
Four years ago, when a similar project
f annexation followed the Hawaiian
evolution. the occasion for maintain
ng the status quo was not even sug-i ,
ested by any power having interests {
n the Pacific. This government cannot {
e expected to proclaim or admit that ]
ny such occasion has since arisen {
ust as it can neither intend nor admit i
hat the projected more perfect union '
f Hawaii TO the United States, by a
'hich the progressive policies and de- {
endent associations of some 10 years q
ave their destined elimination, can !
ljure any legitimate interests of other I
overs in the Pacific. That il will tend !
D strengthen, develop and perpetuate G
UGH commonly beneficial interests is, i
n the contrary, to be expected. t
In thus reviewing the protest you I
resent it gives me pleasure to say q
nat l welcome its frank and friendly r
pirit So far as you take occasion to r
eny what you aptly call the mis-.
hievous suggestion or report that +
apan has designs against the integrity
{ sovereignty of Hawaii, l am glad TO
ssure you that such denial was en-
rely unnecessary. inasmuch as this v
overnment has not doubted and can :
OF for an instant doubt the sincerity L
nd friendliness of Japan in all that .
0ncerns her relations to the United =
tates and to the Hawaiian islands,"
EXCURSION TO THE EAST =
via "