The Portland daily press., 1897-12-08
says the President. Unfortunate
ly he does not specify any

ly he does not specify any
of those considerations, and they are not
| SO evident as to obtrude themselves up
on tho mind of the reader. There are no
doubt considerations which make in
favor OF the annexation of Hawaii, but
to say that they are considerations of dig
nifty and honor seems an i'll considered
assertion although much Difference is due
the source from which it comes.
What are some of the considera-
lions of honor and dignity applicable to
consideration of honor is that a strong
nation should not compel weak one to
sacrifice It's Independence and become a
part of it against it's will either by force
or chicanery, unless the union is clearly
essential TO the self preservation of the
first. In his inaugural message Mr.. Nc
Kinley condemned aggressive conquests
of territory. Probably he meant con-
quests by force, but conquests by chilean.
cry are no whit more defensible than con-
quests by force. There is not the slightest
evidence that a majority of the Hawaiian
people, even excluding the Japanese and
Chinese, who may perhaps be treated as
mere commorants, desire annexation to
this country. On the contrary such evil
dence as there is on this point is all in the
other direction. The only people on the
| island who are clamorous for apnexa-
ton are some $500 Americans, who con-
stitute but very small part of the Ply e
lation, and who have no more -loral right
to tender this island to us than the Eng
fish resident5ss would have to tender 1t to
Englan.dor the Portuguese to Portugal.
WhaG consideration of honor requires a
country to accept tender of territory from
Dpeople to whom it, does not belong? Is
impels to the acceptance of gift under
such circumstances has much more to do
with ACKNOWLEDGMENT than with honor?
Is 1t not a consideration Of honor also
that nation should live up to the
principles which 1t avowsf 1t
would certainly seem SO. For great
many years now the party ofsthe admin
istration has been contending that the
black man of the South should have
equal rights with the white man. Meth
er race, color nor previous condition of
servitude was to be permitted to count
against him. He was to have as large a
part in governing the whites and de-
Gliding public questions as the white was
to have in governing him, and deciding
public questions. How does this doc
trine show up in the Hawaiian annexa-
ton scheme? In this way, that not only
is no dark skinned man to have anything
to say about annexation, but also that
are ITO be consulted. Hawaii Is
rendered US not by plebiscite even OF
the white vote. but by a very small
oligarchy. Can we accept it and not fly
directly in the face of a doctrine We have
inserted in our constitution and preached
from almost every house top, for the past
quarter of a century? In which direction
do considerations of honor point here2
Is it not true that If we were TO be
guided in this matter strictly by consid-
erations Of honor we should never annex
Hawaii until majority of the native
residents of the island expressed desire
OF at least q willingness, to be annexed
r Has the public forgotten how the present
government, which is now rendering II:
the island was brought into being? II
was established under the protection Of
the guns of United States war vessel
and 1t is altogether improbable that it
could have been established but for thai
protection. We are not finding fault Will
that, for it is undoubtedly true that ex
: oept for our interference, or protection
at that time, anarchy would have result
ed. But to say that from the right o.
power then acquired by that government
to rule the island followed the power OF
the part of that government to give Il
away and the duty on the part of THU
government to accept it-a duty SO strong
that to refuse it would be dishonor--
seems to us hasty and ill considered as
sertion, which will not bear the test Of
candid examination.
p |