« AnteriorContinuar »
clusion of all foreign influence save our own, to the extent of upholding eventual annexation as the necessary outcome of that policy.
"Not only is the union of the Hawaiian territory to the United States no new scheme, but it is the inevitable consequence of the relation steadfastly maintained with that mid-Pacific domain for three-quarters of a century. Ito accomplishment, despite successive denials and postponements, has been merely a question of tinue. While its failure in 1893 may not be a cause of congratulation, it is certainly a proof of the disinterestedness of the United States, the delay of four years having abundantly sufficed to establish the right and the ability of the Republic of Hawaii to enver, as a sovereign contractant, upon a conventional union with the United States, thus realizing a purpose held by the Hawaiian people and proclaimed by successive Hawaiian governments through some seventy years of their virtual dependence upon the benevolent protection of the United States. Under such circumstances, annexation is not a change; it is a consummation.
“The report of the Secretary of State exhibits the character and course of the recent negotiation and the features of the treaty itself. The organic and administrative details of incorporation are necessarily left to the wisdom of the Congress, and I cannot doubt, when the function of the constitutional treaty-making power shall have been accomplished, the duty of the National Legislature in the case will be performed with the largest regard for the interests of this rich insular domain and for the welfare of the inhabitants thereof."
On the following day ex-Queen Liliuokalani presented the Secretary of State a formal protest against the treaty and urged upon the Senate to decline to ratify it.
The Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on July 14 made a favorable report urging the ratification of the treaty without amendment. Only seven of the eleven members were present. Senators Davis, Cullom, Foraker, Clark and Morgan cast their votes for the resolution of ratification. Senators Daniel and Turpie did not take a positive stand in opposition to the treaty, but expressed the opinion that it was neither expedient nor consistent with the vast importance of the subject that the treaty should be pressed to immediate consideration.
Both houses of the Hawaiian Legislature ratified the treaty by unanimous vote on September 10.
The Japanese Minister at Washington submitted a protest against the treaty in a letter to Secretary Sherman on June 15, in which he said: "My Government cannot view without concern the prospects of a sudden and complete change in the status of Hawaii, whereby the rights of Japan and of Japanese subjects may be imperilled. While, therefore, they confidently rely upon the t'nited States to maintain toward them a just and friendly attitude in this as in all other matters, they feel that under the circumstances, they cannot be regarded as spectators merely, without inerest in the important change which it has been so possitively asserted is about to take place in the relations of the United States and the Hawaiian Islands,
For this reason, if it is really true that a treaty of annexation is about to be concluded, I feel that I am justified in inquiring from you, Mr. Secretary, what provision has been made therein for the pregervation and maintenance of the rights acquired and enjoyed by Japan in her intercourse with Hawaii under the solemn sanctions of law and of treaty?"
Secretary Sherman sent this letter on the following to the Japane Ministe:
“Sir: Replying to your note of the 15th inst., just received, I have to say that the governments of Hawaii and the United States, by their duly authorized representatives, have signed a treaty annexing the Hawaiian Islands to this country. This has been done in pursuance of the policy long since adopted by the United States, and the treaty will, I understand, be submitted to the Senate of the United States by the President for ratification. As to your inquiry as to the provision made therein concerning the treaties which may be in existence between Japan and the present Hawaiian Government, my understanding is that the Government of the United States does not take upon itself any obligations of the Hawaiian Government arising from treaties or conventions made by it with other governments. It is believed that there is nothing in the proposed treaty prejudicial to the rights of Japan, and certainly the United States has no disposition to disturb the friendly relations which have long existed between the Government of Japan and this country.”
Three days later the Japanese Minister, under instructions the Emperor of Japan, filed the formal protest, citing the following as the reasons for such protest:
"First-The mainter.ance of the status quo of Hawaii is essential to the good understanding of the Powers which have interests in the Pacific.
"Second-The annexation of Hawaii would tend to endanger the residential, commercial and industrial rights of Japanese subjects in Hawaii, secured to them by treaty and by the Constitution and laws of that country.
“Third-Such annexation might lead to the postponement by Hawaii of the settlement of claims and liabilities already existing in favor of Japan under treaty stipulations.
“With reference to the mischievous suggestion or report, which has been so industriously circulated in this country and elsewhere, that Japan has designs against the integrity or sovereignty of Hawaii, I am further instricted by the Imperial Government to state most emphatically and unequivocally that Japan has not now and never had such designs, or designs of any kind whatever, against Hawaii.
"Permit me to add, in conclusion, Mr. Secretary, that in making this protest, and in asking full and careful consideration for it, the Imperial Government are actuated by what they regard as an imperative duty, and not in the remotest degree by a desire to embarrass the United States. They prize most highly the cordial relations which have always existed between our countries, and they confidently trust that their representations
on this occasion will be received in that spirit of justice and fair dealing which has so notNativity. British Miscellaneous
Population. Males. Females. 2,250 1,406
844 3,057 1,907
ably characterized the intercourse of Japan and the United States."
On December 16 the Japanese Minister at Washington presented the reply of his Government to Secretary Sherman's pote, in which the protest was withdrawn. It was suggested, in addition, that the purpose of the Japanese authorities was to secure specific assurances from the United States that, in case Hawaii should be annexed, all Japanese interests would be fully protected.
109,020 72,517 36,503 The population of Americans is comparatively small, but the official figures show
that the commercial interests of citizens of the United States are larger than those of all other countries. Of total invested capital of $32,146, 601 in sugar plantations the proportion held by United States citizens and others of American origin is $25,516,474; the total value of American property in the islands is estimated at $13,731,544, while the total amount of foreign capital other than American is only about $9,000,000.
JAPAN-HAWAII DISPUTE. The significant growth of the Japanese population in Hawaii led to unpleasant complications between the two countries early in 1897. A treaty made in 1871 guaranteed to Japanese subjects all the rights of the most favored nations. In 1895 an act was passed excluding all immigrants from Hawaii not having $50 in coin, except contract laborers who were duly to be sent back. It was claimed later that the Japanese companies or their agents had resorted to the device of making temporary loans to immigrants to secure their landing, and that many immigrantspractically paupers. had been thrust upon the community. The influx of “Japanese laborers" rose to the number of about a thousand a month, and it was claimed that there were many infractions of the spirit of the law, and that the Mikado's object was to secure political control of the islands in the near future. The next step taken by the Hawaiian Government was to prohibit the landing of 535 out of 670 so-called immigrants arriving on a Japanese steamer, and the Supreme Court decided that the Collector at Honolulu had jurisdiction in the matter; but after a reinvestigation made in the presence of the Japanese representative the number of refusals was reduced to 413, and these were promptly returned to Japan at the expense of the company bringing them out. A later and similar case was that where 163 out of 316 were rejected. The Japanese residents in Hawaii then appealed to their home Government for redress, and the Japanese Minister entered a vigorous protest against the action of the Honolulu authorities, with demands for indemnity. These protests, etc., were emphasized by the appearance of the Japanese warship Naniwa in the harbor of Honolulu. Next, Hawaii proposed to submit the dispute to arbitration, which was accepted by Japan in July. The subjects of arbitration included that relating to immigration; the increase of duty upon saki (a liquor largely imported and consumed by the Japanese on the islands) from 15 cents to $1 a gallon, and questions of minor importance.
BEHRING SEA SEAL FISHERIES,
On April 8, 1897, President McKinley appointed John W. Foster and Charles s. Hamlin a commission to consider and report how best to protect the seal fisheries of Behring Sea. It had been represented to the President that as the rules for the prevention of poaching were not satisfactory or efficient, more efficacious measures should be devised against pelagic sealing. The Commission was authorized to report wherein the existing rules, adopted in pursuance of the provisions of the Paris award, were inadequate to insure the protection of the seals, and what further rules should be agreed to by the United States and Great Britain to prevent poaching.
The modus vivendi of 1891 provided that for the purpose of preserving the seal species in Behring Sea, England should prohibit seal killing in that part of the sea lying eastward of the line of demarkation, described in Article I of the treaty between the United States and Russia, and that she should use her best efforts to insure the observance of this prohibition by British subjects and vessels. This country agreed to prohibit seal killing under the same conditions in excess of 7,500 to be taken for the subsistence of the natives in that region. Persons or vessels violating the agreement were to be seized and handed over to the country to which they belonged and punished.
In July Secretary of State Sherman sent to the American Ambassador at London, important and exhaustive instructions for his guidance in urging upon the British Government a compliance with the provisions of the Behring Sea award. The instructions were prepared as a reply to a note received from Lord Salisbury, the Premier of the British Government. Lord Salisbury's letter was a reply to the proposals of the President for a modus vivendi for the suspension of all killing of seals for the season of 1897, and for a joint conference of the Powers concerned with a view to the necessary measures being adopted for the preservation of the fur seal in the Northern Pacific.
Mr. Sherman noted that the President was greatly disappointed that the proposals should be rejected, especially as such rejection
unsubstantial and inadequate reasons. He analyzed at some length reports made by Dr. Jordan and Professor Thompson to the British Government,
upon which Lord
HAWAII STATISTICS. The numerical strength of the principal elements of the population of Hawaii in 1897 was as follows:
Nativity. Population. Males. Females. Hawaiians ... 31,019
16,399 14,620 Japanese
24,407 19,212 5,195 Chinese
21,616 19,167 2,449 Portuguese 15, 100 8,202 6,898 Part Hawaiians. 8,485 4,249 4,236 American 3,086 1,975
Salisbury based his rejection of the pro- tice of pelagic sealing, if continued, will posals, and declared that in view of the not only bring itself to an end, but will explicit language used in these reports “it work the destruction of a great interest is not easy to understand how Lord Salis- of a friendly nation, Her Majesty's Govbury can reconcile his refusal to entertain ernment would desist from an act so the proposals of the President with the in- suicidal and so unneighborly, and which terests of his own countrymen, to say certainly could not command the approval nothing of the friend'y relations which he of its own people. desires to maintain with the United States, “The President therefore cherishes the Russia and Japan." Mr. Sherman then hope that even at this late day the Britnoted the operations of the pelagic fleet in ish Government may yet yield to his conBehring Sea since the Paris regulations tinued desire, so often expressed, for a conhad been in force, as follows:
ference of the interested Powers, and in 1894—Thirty-seven vessels, 31,585 seals delivering to Lord Salisbury a copy of this taken, or an average of 853 per vessel. instruction you will state to him that the
1895-Fifty-nine vessels, 44,169 seals President will hail with great satisfaction taken, or an average of 748 per vessel. any indication on the part of Her
1896—Sixty-seven vessels, 29,500 seals Majesty's Government of a disposition to taken, or an average of 440 per vessel. agree upon such a conference.'
It thus appears that nearly double the UNITED STATES-RUSSIA-JAPAN CONnumber of vessels in 1896 were not able to
FERENCE. take as many sea's as were taken in 1894,
Both Russia and Japan made arrangeand the catch per vessel fell off near y
ments for the conference and appointed one-half. Mr. Sherman next reviewed the
delegates. Subsequently the Canadian manner in which the waters embraced in
Government requested the withdrawal of the award area had been patrolled, in order
Great Britain from the Conference if Rusto see that the regulations were not vio
sia and Japan were to be represented, and lated by the sealing vessels, and criticised
on October 6 the officials of the British the British patrol as not being adequate.
Foreign Office communicated to Colonel He continued thus:
John Hay, the United States Ambassador "The obligations of an international
at London, that their Government declined award, which are equally imposed on both
to take part in any conference with the parties to its terms, cannot properly be
representatives of Russia and Japan. The assumed or laid aside by one of the parties
British Government, however, asserted its only at its pleasure. Such an award, which
willingness to confer with the United in its practical operation is binding only
States alone on the subject, but insisted on one party in its obligations and burdens
that Russia and Japan were not interested and to be enjoyed mainly by the other
in the Behring Sea seals to a degree enparty in its benefits, is an award which,
titling them to a representation at the in the interest of public morality and good
conference. On October 12 Secretary Sherconscience should not be maintained.
man sent a reply in which he expressed Having in view the expressed object of
astonishment that Great Britain should the arbitration at Paris and the declared
withdraw, inasmuch as in the verbal nepurpose of the arbitrators in prescribing
gotiations between Ambassador Hay and the regulations when it became apparent,
Lord Salisbury, and in the written coras it did after the first year's operation of
respondence, specific reference was made them, and with increased emphasis each
to the participation of Russia and Japan. succeeding year, that the regulations were In view of the differences which had inadequate for the purpose, it was the
arisen, Secretary Sherman plain duty of the British Government to
conference in accordance with Lord Salisacquiesce in the request of that of the
exUnited States for a conference to deter
bury's proposition-that is, between
perts of Great Britain, Canada and the mine what further measures were neces
United States. Lord Salisbury accepted sary to secure the end had in view by the
this solution on October 15. arbitration.
The Russia-Japan-United States Confer"A course so persistently followed for
ence assembled at Washington on October the last three years has practically ac- 23, with the following as delegates: Ruscomplished the commercial extermination
sia-Pierre Botkine, M. De Routkowsky, of the fur seals, and brought to naught
M. De Wollant, Chargé d'Affaires, Russian the patient labors and well-meant con
Legation. Japan-Shiro Fujita, Professor clusions of the Tribunal of Arbitration.
Kakichi Mitsukuri. United States John Upon Great Britain must therefore rest,
W. Foster, Charles S. Hamlin, President in the public conscience of mankind, the
David Starr Jordan, The Conference endresponsibility for the embarrassment in
ed its sittings on October 28, first agreeing the relations of the two nations which must result from such conduct. One of the
to a proposition calculated to bring about
a complete change in the sealing question. evil results is already indicated in the
Its special features contemplated an absogrowing conviction of our people that the refusal of the British Government to carry
lute suspension of all pelagic sealing, and
a restriction of such sealing within narout the recommendations of that tribunal
row limits. will needlessly sacrifice an important interest of the United States. This is shown
UNITED STATES-ENGLAND-CANADA by the proposition seriously made in Con
CONFERENCE. gress to abandon negotiations and destroy On November 5, acting upon the propos the sea's on the islands as the speedy end sition of Lord Salisbury, Canada selected to a dangerous controversy, although such Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Premier of Canada, a measure has not been entertained by this and Sir Louis Davies, Minister of Marine Department. We have felt assured that, and Fisheries, delegates to a tripartite as it has been demonstrated that tha prac- conference to be conducted by the experts
catch of seals in the North Pacific for the season, 38, 700, against 73,000 in 1896. The total catch of seals in 1897 is divided as follows: Taken by British vessels, 30,800; by American vessels, 4,100; by Japanese vessels, 3,800. The catch in Behring Sea was 16,650 for 1897, against 29,500 in 1896. of the catch in Behring Sea, British vessels took 15,600 and American vessels 1,050. The figures make no distinction between British and Canadian vessels, as practically all the sealing is done by Canadian vessels, which, however, are nominally classed as British.
In view of the statement of experts that the season was a better one for the taking of seals than in 1896, the conclusion to be drawn from the figures is that the seal herd has been greatly reduced by indiscriminate slaughter.
representing the United States, England and Canada. The convention began at Washington on November 10, with the following experts present: Professor Jordan, United States; Professor Thompson, England, and Professor Macoun, Canada. The other representatives present were John W. Foster and Charles S. Hamlin, United States; Sir Julian Pauncefote, the British Ambassador, and Sir Wilfrid Laurier and Sir Louis Davies. These last-named five representatives were privileged only to ask questions and exchange views incidental to the taking of expert testimony. This conference ended its sittings on November 21, and a protocol was signed by the two secretaries-Mr. Venning, on behalf of Canada; Mr. Clark, on behalf of the United States—and Mr. Hamlin, the chairman of the Conference, which set forth the circumstances under which the meeting was held, with the minutes of the proceedings, and to some extent showing the circumstances leading up to the agreement. A few days later the Canadian Government sent its reply to the proposition of the United States that the Canadians should stop killing seals for a year beginning January 1, 1898, to the effect that it was not possible to comply with the proposal, as every British subject has a right to engage in pelagic sealing unless prohibited by imperial decree, which could only be issued by authority of Imperial Parliament, and the Parliament would not meet till February. The reply also suggested that the proposed joint commission be appointed and meet at once, when, on conclusion of negotiations on the questions at issue, the necessary legislation could be secured from the British Parliament and the suspension of pelagic sealing go into effect in the spring
It was stated that the United States had offered to pay the Canadian Government a lump sum of money to extinguish pelagic sealing, but that the Canadian Premier refused the proposition.
CLAIMS AWARD. The arbitrators appointed to adjust the claims of Canadian sealers for losses sustained by the seizure of their vessels made an award on December 22, 1897, of $464,000, with two reserved cases-those of the Black Diamond for $5,000, and the Ada for $1,000. In 1894 the United States offered $400,000, and Canada claimed $450,000 as
a settlement. Afterward a compromise was reached, and the amount was placed at $425,000, but Congress refused to vote this sum.
SEAL-CATCH STATISTICS. The official statistics of the catch of seals for the season of 1897 were made public at the conference of Russia, Japan and the United States, and they showed two features most important in sustaining the American contention: That the catch had fallen off about one-half, showing conclusively that the seal herd was being rapidly wiped out; and, second, that the catch of seals from the American islands in Behring Sea was about 15 to 1 as between the Canadian sealers under the British flag and American sealers. The same proportion was shown to exist throughout the waters of the North Pacific. In detail, the figures for the season were: Total
THE CUBAN REVOLT. The principal features of the insurrection in Cuba in the first three months of 1897 were the communication to the United States Senate on January 5 by Mr. Olney, the cretary of te, rega
ling the power of the President of the United States in the matter of recognition of the Cuban Republican Government; the campaign of General Weyler in the eastern provinces and his complete failure to take advantage of the shock caused to the insurgents by the loss, in December, 1896, of their boldest leader, General Antonio Maceo, and the serious doubt he aroused as to the ability of the Spanish commanders to cope with the forces against them; also the capture of the insurgent General Juan Ruis Rivera, on March 28. In connection with the latter incident Senator Allen, of Nebraska, on April 1, introduced in the United States Senate a resolution protesting against the alleged purpose of the Spanish authorities in Cuba to try General Rivera by summary court martial, upon which there was an exciting debate. In the meanwhile Mr. Sherman, Secretary of State, made a verbal protest to the Spanish Minister at Washington, and a few days later there was made public the reply from the Spanish Government that General Rivera would not be executed, but would be treated as a prisoner of war.
On January 25, in response to a resolution of the Senate, President Cleveland submitted а. list of American citizens, either native born or naturalized, who had been arrested in Cuba since the beginning of the insurrection, together with the action taken in each case. The total arrests were seventy-four; of these seven had been tried, and appeals were taken in the cases of Sanguilly and Someillah from the sentences imposed. Seven were correspondents of American newspapers who had been arrested and banished. Another case was that of Dr. Ricardo Ruiz, a physician resident in Guanabacoa, who had died in the prison at that place, his friends claiming that his death was due to inhuman treatment by his jailers. On February 21 Secretary Olney directed the American Minister at Madrid to demand of the Spanish Government a full inquiry into the circumstances of the death of Dr. Ruiz. Later, in April, President McKinley appointed William J. Calhoun, of Illinois,
special counsel to Consul General Lee, complete amiesty to all political exiles, with directions to investigate the case, and going to the extent of encouraging the rehe went to Havana for that purpose. The turn of ail who emigrated from Cuba volreport was that, although no positive or untarily and those who considered themdirect proof was found that the doctor died selves obliged to remain in exile for a from an actual assault, his death was due purely political motive, reason, cause to congestion of the brain.
act, and giving guarantees of protection After Mr. McKinley became President and assistance to life and property. notice was served upon the Spanish Government that the United States recognized a state of civil war in Cuba which de
CRETE. manded a treatment of prisoners taken in Disorders broke out afresh on the Island action by either side different from that of Crete on February 1, 1897, arising from followed by General Weyler. It was also the hatred existing between the Christians stated that American citizens pursuing and their Turkish rulers. Four days later lawful occupations in a lawful way would the Mahometans and Christians had be held to be entitled to the protection of pitched battle in the city of Canea, when the law. On May 17 President McKinley the city was set on fire and fully 300 sent a message to Congress suggesting an Christians were killed. On February 8 the appropriation to be used in relieving the union of Crete and Greece was proclaimed distress of American citizens resident in by the people at Halepa, and the Greek Cuba, and a week later a bill making an fleet reached Canea on the same day. On appropriation of $50,000 became a law. February 11 the Greek Government formu
On April 20 the Queen Regent of Spain lated a notification to the Powers that the signed a decree instituting certain reforms ties of race and religion compelled her to of government in Cuba. It provided among intervene on behalf of the Christians of other things a Council of Administration, Crete. The Greek forces attacked and a sort of parliament for the government captured the Turkish garrisons on Febof the island, subject to certain super- ruary 17, and the foreign Power; landed visory authority of the Crown; also their naval forces at Canea and Sitia later. scheme to permit Cuba to revise her own On February 20 the United States Senate tariff schedules. The decree was the di- adopted a resolution of sympathy for the rect result of the announcement by Gen- Greeks and Cretans. On February 23 a eral Wey'er that the western part of the mass-meeting of sympathizers was held in island was completely pacified. This was Chickering Hall, New-York City. On the proved later to be a mere theory of Gen- same day King George of Greece issued eral Weyler.
a proclamation enjoining the Cretans to Following the assassination of Senor pacify themselves and to confide in the Canovas, Prime Minister of Spain, Senor efforts of Greece to uphold and maintain Sagasta was made Prime Minister on Oc- the rights of the Hellenic people. On Febtober 2. Six days later General Weyler ruary 24 the Governor's palace at Canea was recalled and Captain-General Blanco was burned; the Powers ordered Greece to was chosen to succeed him. General Blanco withdraw her army of occupation, and reached Havana on October 30 and at once Queen Olga of Greece returned her Rusassumed control of affairs and instituted sian insignia. King George replied to the several changes in the conduct of the demands of the Powers on the following campaign against the insurgents.
day that it was impossible to withdraw On November 27 the Spanish Govern- the troops from Crete. ment officially published a decree tender- On February 25 Lord Salisbury, Premier ing to Cuba and Porto Rico a system of of Great Britain, presented a scheme of autonomy. The scheme provided that the autonomy for Crete, which Turkey opSpanish Parliament or Cortes should be posed. The Cretans rejected it three days the central executive power, and that the later, and pleaded for union with Greece. government in the colony should be the The Greek Government, on March 8, sent colonial parliament, the colonial chambers, word to the Powers that it was doubtful legislative assemblies, and the Governor- that autonomy could fulfil their aim, and General. It was proposed that the Council requested that the Cretans be permitted of Administration should consist of thirty- to deciare their preference of government. five members, eighteen of whom to be On May 21 the Cretan insurgents were adelected, and the others nominated by the vised by the Greek Government to accept mother country. The Governor-General is autonomy on condition that the Turkish to exercise the supreme command, is given troops should be previously withdrawn complete liberty to appea to the officials from the island. On the same day the of his secretariat, to issue and execute Mussulmans telegraphed to the Sultan that laws and decrees, negotiate international autonomy under the conditions existing on treaties and conventions, etc. It is pro- the island of Crete "cannot fail to perposed that the secretaries of the Cuban petuate race wars, and will only briefly autonomous government shall be five, viz. : postpone the revival of the annexation Justice and Interior, Finance, Public In- question with all its disastrous consestruction, Public Works and Communica- quences. The withdrawal of the Greek tions, and Industry and Commerce, all to troops followed, and on May 23 the last be appointed by the Governor-General. detachment of the Greek expeditionary On
December 14 Governor-General force embarked for Greece. Then foMowed Blanco issued a proclamation granting the war between Turkey and Greece