New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-12-12
A NATIONAL, NOT PARTISAN. QUESTION

In advocating the annexation Of Hawaii Pres
ident Mckinley should not be supposed to act
from partisan motives. Addition to the terri
tory of the United States should never be a
partisan measure. Since the whole Nation must
be called upon to defend an acquisition II 1t
ever needs defence, and must share the burdens
II any are involved, and also all the benefits
that may accrue, It is peculiarly desirable that
annexation Of territory should always be con-
sidered and decided upon purely non-partsan
grounds Were the question one OF party, 1t
might he pertinent to ask whether those who
opposed the acquisition OF California or Texas
or Louisiana or Florida ever gained anything
In public estimation. But every such question
ought to be treated a higher plane. No par
tisan advantage can be suggested which the
annexation Of Hawaii could secure, nor Is there
q reason for supposing that opposition to 1t will
benefit any party.
When Captain Mahan wrote 30 strongly OF
the immense superiority which possession OF
the Hawaiian Islands would give to a naval
Power In the Northern Pacific he was not in
spired by a blind and bigoted partisanshp
His impressive statements, the truth Of which
has been recognized by the ablest tacticians OF
all nations, 20 far to explain the antagonism to
the Hawaiian treaty which Is found working
underground at Washington, not openly. be
cause It would help the treaty II the exertions
of certain foreign Powers against It were
known, but mainly under pretence OF anxiety
about National expenditure. or elevation OF cit
zenshp, or particularly the sugar interest. TIC
nut the latest pretext aside. II is enough to say
that the rapid development OF sugarbeet culture
in Pacific States, although in direct competition
with the coole labor which has been employed
in Hawaii but could not be under United States
laws, sufices to prove that sugar production
| I'm the islands without that advantage could moi
embarrass the Industry in this country. The
hands are those Of Esau, but the mind behind
| them is that of foreign Power.
It is childish to ignore the fact that every ad
d,tion of territory involves some possible cost
This year the United States Is for the first time
called upon to pay something for the mainten
ance of government In Alaska, although the
! purchase from Russia by Secretary Seward wa.
In its day denounced with extreme bitterness
| as a wanton waste Of public money, and as sure
to involve ncalculable expense thereafter. Tht
Nation begins to pay something of consequence
for its far-off possession when that possession
| comes to be of value. The Hawaiian Islands
are not icebound, nor can their acquisition bt
derided as an act Of folly. They are already
productive, without the advantages which would
attract American settlement and enterprise. Blu
the main question is whether It would not cos
more every year not to have them In expense
OF Notifications and naval defence Of commerce
on the Pacific Coast than It would cost to &C
cept fortify and defend them as American terri
tory.
It Is pity that there should grow up any
thing like a partisan antagonism to this meas
ure When some of the ablest and most zeal
Gus Democrats are foremost In advocating It