1^, /^ .P35 Copy 1 ANNEXATION OF HAWAII. "lF6'S<«" square miles of additional territory, the question of annexation was ever submitted to the people of either the territory annexed or of the United States to be acted upon by a direct vote? Mr. DINSMORE, I will suggest to the gentleman the case of Texas. , ^ , Mr. PEAROE of Missouri. My friend says Texas. I expected that suggestion. Of course we all know the details of the history of the annexation of Texas, and it is needless to relate them here. But perhaps you all do not know one fact in connection with that transaction. The annexation of Texas was first sought by a treaty which failed of passage through the United States Senate, but it was the basis of another and subsequent treaty, and the endeavor to secure the result finally terminated in resolutions which passed the House of Representatives and afterwards the Senate and be- came a law by the approval of the Executive. After those reso- lutions were passed the legislature of Texas was convened, and a convention of the people was summoned to consider the then pending propositions. , , , . A constitution was drafted and was adopted by both the legis- lature and the convention, and later the people were called upon to vote upon the ratification of the acts which had been done by those bodies. The main (luestiou at this time was the adoption of the constitution, and the question of annexation was merely inci- dental. Yet, Mr. Speaker, although the population of Texas at that time, exclusive of Indians, was over 130,U00, only about 4,100 votes were cast for ratification. Only 4,000 votes out of a popu- lation of more than 100,000. Now, I invite you to compare that vote with the present case. The people of the Hawaiian Islands for more than fifty years have been living under a constitution granted to them by the third Kamehameha, and that constitii- tion from the outset has prescribed the qualifications of electors. The provisions of this instrument, although changed at various times by the Hawaiian Legislatiire, has never taken away the right of suffrage from the people. It existed in the time of Kalakaua, and it was one of the prominent reasons which led the late Queen Liliuokalani to attempt the overthrow of the constitutional rights of the people and to bring about a return to the absolutism of the early kings. The present constitution also prescribes the qualifi- cations of electors, and the qualified electors of Hawaii who have spoken upon this subject, directly or indirectly, constitute as large a percentage of the population of Hawaii as did the votes cast upon the ratification oi: the annexation of Texas taken in compar- ison with the population of that State. I was exceedingly glad to learn from the speech of my good friend from Arkansas [Mr. Dinsmore] that amid all the reasons why the Hawaiian Islands should not be annexed to the United States he freely and frankly admitted that there was one po-wer- fal consideration in favor of these resolutions. He says that the possession of the Hawaiian Islands by the United States would greatly increase the power of the American Government to keep foreign nations off our shores. In (iod's name, what else do we want them for, looking at the subject from a military point of view? We are not seeking the ac(iuisition of the Hawaiian Islands to make aggressive war upon the rest of mankind. The possession of the islands lor purposes of public defens? is 3i58 the exact point, and the only point, for which I am arguing and contending. One of the great reasons why we want and must have those islands is to make it aiisolii ely impossible forafot-eign goveiTiment to assail us, and especially to render it impossible for an Asiatic power, with an Asiatic religion, to seat iiseif w.thin 2,000 mle^ of our Pacific coast. In my judgment no admiss.on could be made that would constitute a stronger argument for the alopt on or these resolutions tlian the fair and honest statement of my honorable fr;end from Arkansas (Mr. D^xsmore]. Another pomt of difficulty which troubles my friends who op- pose this measure is t-.ie question of tne cost o:' maintenance. Upon that queition the records of the Hawaiian (J-A-eram-'nt fm'n sh us valuable information. Aggregating the pnhlic reve- nues from 1878 to I49i. and decucting from the aggregate the ex- penditures during the same period of time, we find that for a period of fourteen years the expenditure over revenue is only §;0.>.")34. notwithstanding the fact that during that period the islands suifered two revolutions, with all the extraordinary ex- penses incident thereto. In ]8'J6 thepublic revenues were §1,997, - 818 and the aggregate expenditures were $1,901,190, leaving a bal- ance to the credit of the Government on December ol, i80o, of $9o.G27. Under any reasonable administration of affairs by an intelligent territorial government tne Hawaiian Islands can be made fully self-supporting. Now, Mr. Speaker, whatever views people may have heretofore had upon th^s subject, whether those views have been upon general political lines or whether they have proc;eeded upon commercial lines, we are to-day confronted with the condition of war. and we are compe led to consider this question from a standpoint which the oi^ponents of annexation have always heretofore scouted as a possibility too remote to constitute a reasonable argument. Whether we will or no, we are compelled to look at this subject from that standpoint and legislate with reference to it. With a voice almost unanimous the people of the United States have declared at the polls and through us, their representatives, that the island of Cuba shall be hereafter free from the sovei-- eignty of Spain. To make that declaration good and to compel a recognition of that independence by Spain we have declared war up,U0a liberty-loving people than upon the sympathy of any foreign nation, however friendly, or upon all Europe combined.' God helps those who help them- selves. Mr. Sp^a'ker, we have had a rude awakening since this crisis began. Fortunately for us. and perhaps fortuuate for the world, we have had to deal with a nation intinitely weaker than ourselves in material resources, and as illy prepared to meet the exigencies of a great war. Less than five years ago nearly 1,000 cities and towns located upon open ports and upon tributary streams along and contigu: ms to our 5,00J miles of coast were absolutely de ense- less against foreign attack. Five years ago the Navy of the United States was the weakest of the first-class powers and. for lack of mu- nitions and crews practiced m the service of modern ordnance, was comparatively useless for offensive or defensive war; and yet, Mr. Speaker, we were asserting against every nation in Europe a doc- trine of exclusion from the Western Hemisphere, never recognized as a tenet of mternat'.onal law. and depending alone for its main- tenance upon the moral influence of this Republic. However just and nec&^sary the Monroe doctrine may be from our standpoint of view, and however deep-rooted it may be in the conscience of the American people, it is unquestionably an affront to every nation in Europe, and is to-day acknowledged with illy concealed reluc- tance by Japan in her relations with the Hawaiian Islands. I warn gentlemen on this floor that we have seen enough in the last twelve mouths to satisfy any reflecting man, that the perpetu- ation of the Monroe doctrme can only be made possible by the speedy development of the naval power of the United States up to a degree of efficiency that will enable us at all times to suc- cessfully resist the encroachments of any government on earth. What does this involve, Mr. Speaker? Shall we rely upon the in- tegrity of foreign alliances? Why, sir, no such convention was ever made anywhere or at any time but it was torn into shreds at the dictation of sell-interest or by the shitting demands of on- coming exigencies. I venture the assertion that if Congress had given heed twenty years ago to the warnings which have been iterated and reter- ated over and over again on this floor, every American port would to-day be impregnable against assault, our Navy won d be peer- less upon the seas, no war with Spaia would ever have occurred, three hundred millions of money would have been saved, Cuba would l>e free, her people, wasted by starvation and savagery, would be on the high road of progress, and the Maine, instead of rotting i encath the loathsome waters of Havana Harbor with her murdered crew, would be riding the waves. 1 ask auain. Mr. Speaker, what does the maintenance of the Monroe doctrine involve? We are not so wise, our rights and responsibilities are not so small, our statesmanship is not so far- seeing, but that we can learn a lesson of wisdom from our com- petitors in the race for nalionil development. Witn the advent of steam as a motive power Great Britain, without halting for the evolution of the future, began iunnediately to reconstruct her navy. New armaments and dry docks followed hard after, and ai58 9 then began the establishment of that wonderful system of supply stations which to-day belt the world. While continental Europe and America remained wrapped up in the conservatism of the fathers. Great Britain pushed forward into the new order of things until at every coigne of militp.ry and commercial vantage, at Gibraltar, at Malta, at Port Said, at Aden, at Bombay, at Calcutta, at Madras, at Colombo, at Singapore, at Sydney, at Melbourne, at New Zealand, at Hongkong, at Victoria,- and at Vancouver, she sits intrenched with hmitiess stores to reenforce her naval power. For the purposes of th s consideration it mat- ters not whether we pra se or condemn her foreign and colonial policy. She sits complacent behind her naval ramparts, mistress of the seas, with incalcuhible powers of defense and olfense, able and ready to vindicate her sovereignty everywhere, and to guarantee at all times safety to every advance agent of her com- mercial enterprise. Ages before Columbus lifted the veil from the Western Hemi- sphere Asiatic commerce was the pursuit of empires. Along its shifting routes, from the Phoenicians down to the present day, great cities have risen and passed away, their aggran^lizement and decay inexorably measured by tbeir ability to adapt themselves to new developments or by their disposition to hold on to obsolete and worn-out systems. Constantinople, Genoa, Venice. Lisbon, and Amsterdam have each in its day gathered wealth and splendor from the inexhaustible stores of the Orient, and each has fallen from leadership in proportion as it has kept its eye on the past rather than upon the future. England, looking behind, saw the cities of the Mediterranean rise and fall with the shifting of con- trol over the great thoroughfares to Asia. Looking into the future, she saw a great productive population gathering upon the eastern coast of America, spreading in great waves over a conti- nent, subduing mountains and harnessing rivers to its uses, while it reached out across the Pacific for a share in that won- derful commerce. Foreseeing the magnitude of this new com- petition, she bought the control of the Suez Canal, deepened and widened its channel, enlarged her ship capacity from 3,500 to 7,000 tons, and reduced her freight charges from $7 to $3 per long ton. Not content with that provision of security, she built a transcontinental railway through Canada and established a steam- ship hne from Vancouver to China and Australia. Not content with that provision, she undertook to gain a lodgment at the mouth of the Orinoco, in defiance of the Monroe doctrine, and ia to-day reaching for an isthmian route to the Indies, to fortify and still further facilitate her monopoly of oriental commerce. Now, what is all this to us? In the first pbice, Mr. Speaker, it emphasizes the fact that while the development of the American Navy is absolutely essential to the maintenance of the Monroe doctrine, and to the development of our commerce with foreign nations, and to the protection of our own coast against foreign attack, a navy without practicable and defensible coaling stations is as useless as an army withoiit food. No man can foresee the potentiality of the forces which are gath- ering on the Asiatic coast. With Great Britain in India, in Poly- nesia, in the Malachian Straits, and in Hongkong, with France in Cambodia, with Russia in Manchuria, with Germany in her newly acquired Chinese ports, and with Japan pushi7ig forward with prodigious strides, it is apparent on the face of the situation that the United States must either surrender the commerce which 345S 10 slie has already acquired or she must fortify herself by all the means known to the establishment of commercial power, and which have been advantageous agencies in the experience of com- peting nations. It is for these reasons, looking at the subject from a stand- point ot national defense and national progress, that I have ior many years advocated the peaceful acquisition of the Hawaiian Islands. I happen to have been twice in the Hawaiian Islands. I was there lirst in 18j1, and as a result of that visit I became and have ever since remained an ardent advocate of annexation, believing that action to be not onl}' desirable but necessary, and both not only from a military but from a commercial pomt of view. I am not guided by any party or political declarations ui'on this subject. I was thoroughly convinced years ago that the acquisition of these islands, with the facilities afforded in Pearl Harbor, was absolutely necessary in order to a successful defense of our Pacific coast. From a militai-y point of view the most interesting feature in these islands is the harbor which I have already mentioned. It is situated in the island of Oahu, about 7 miles from the city of Honolulu. The distance from the harbor to the open sea is about 4 miles, and they are connected by a naiTOw passage not more than a third of a mile in width. At the outer end of this passage there is a sand lar, easily removable at a cost of about $100, 000. In this harbor there are 3 square miles of water which is from 5 to 10 fathoms deep, and an area of smaller size from 2 to 4 fathoms in depth. The locality is free from storms of suffi- cient severity to endanger shipping, and in the neighborhood aro abundant supplies of fresh and healthful water. The harbor approaches are easily defensible, and it is calciilated by military experts that §500,000 will make it substantially im- pregnable against naval attacks. Here the entire American Navy can ride in absolute security. There are no other inclosed har- bors in the entire group, and none other exists for thousands of miles west or south. Throughout the eastern two-thirds of the North Pacific Ocean it is the only place available as a naval and coaling station outside the American coast. The control of Pearl Harbor, therefore, gives to the nation which holds it the mastery of the Pacific Ocean north of the Equator, and it is, therefore, of incalculable strategic value to the United States. A foreign power possessing Pearl Harbor would be within easy striking dis- tance of the Pacific coast, and in case of war would have the ability to speedily annihilate, not only American commerce on the open Pacific Ocean, but also our coastwise trade, from Alaska to its southernmost point. What stronger argument for the possession of the Hawaiian Is- lands can be conceived of than the fact that our Philippine fleet, if compelled by the exigencies of war or by stress of weather to abandon its preFent vantage ground, has no place of safety or supply short of the harbor of San Francisco, and is subject, while perhaps in a crippled condition, to pursuit and attack throughout that entire distance until within the sheltering embrace of the Golden Gate? Captain Mahan, whose splendid essay upon sea power has ex- cited the applause of the world, says in a recent paper: It is not praf:tieat)lo for any transpacific country to invade oiir Pacific coast witlioiit occupying Hawaii as a base. 3 5< 11 And further: It Ls obvious that if wc do not hold tlioso islands oiirsolves wo can not expect tho nontralM in t ho war to prevent tho other Ix-lli^erents from oecnpyiiig them, nor can the iuliahitants themselves pri^veut it. In sliort. wo Hhould need a larger navy to defend tho Pacific coast, because wo should have to not only defend our own coast but to prevent bj- naval force an enemy from oc- cupying the islan Is, whereas if wo preoccupied them fortifications would preserve them to us. Another eminent anthority, George Melville, Chief Engineer of the United States Navj', saj's: Hawaii bridges the stretch of seas, which, without the island group, would be. at this stage in the development of marine propulsion, impassalile to aa eneiiiy'.s Heet. Pearl Harbor is tho sole key to the full delenso of our west- ern coast, and that key should lie in our grasp only. It does not make a particle of difference what the condition of China is to-day. In the philosophy of that mysterious people, "waiting" is the nio^t God-like of human virtues — all things come to him who waits. It matters not how friendly Japan is under present circumstances. It is of no importance that Eng- land and Russia are engrossed in a contest lor commercial su- premacy in the far East. There is not an exigency in the great draraa of the world's politics to-day that may not be shifted into new rf^lations and unexpected contests to-morrow. While Pearl Harhor can be made a veritable Gibraltar in point of impregnability, it forma an unxiaralleled vantage ground from which a naval force can sail with a full equipment of coal and munitions for attack in any quarter. Again says this eminent authority: Pearl Harbor would form a first lino of defense, and an enemy from the open sea would violate some of the cardinal principles of naval strategy and invite sure disaster in attacking our western coast without first blockading or defeating tho Hawaiian squadron. Says Admiral Belknap: A glance at a chart of the Pacific will indicate to the most casual observer the great importance and inestimable value of this island as a strategic point. Indeed, it would seem that nature had established that gi'oup to be ultimately occupied as an outpost, as it were, of the great Repul)lic on its western bor- der, and that the time had now come for the fulfillment of said design. Lieutenant-General Schofield, after a personal examination of the Hawaiian Islands, expressed the following cogent views: I have ahvays regarded the ultimate annexation of the islands as a public necessity. I hp^vo likened that harbor to a commanding pusition in front of a defensive line which the army in the field is compelled to occupy. The army must occupy that advance position and hold it at whatever cost or else the enemy will occupy it with his artillery and dominate the main line. If we do not occupy and fortify Pearl Harbor, our enemy will occupy it as a base from which "tj> conduct operations against our Pacific cnast and the Isthmian Canal. One of tho great advantages of Pearl Harbor to us con.sista in the fact that no navy would bo required to defend it. It is a deep land- locked arm of tho sea, easily defended by fortifications placed near its mouth, with its anchorage beyond the reacli of guns from tho ocean. Cruisers and other war ships which might be overpowered at sea. as well as merchant ves- sels, would find there beyond the land defenses absolute security against naval attack. The following is the opinion of Admiral Dupont on this phase of tho subject: It is imjKjssible to estimate too highly tho value and importance of the Sandwich Islands, whether in a commercial or military point of view. Should circumstances place them in our hands, they would prove a most important acquisition intimately connected with our commercial supremacy in those seas. The unqualified and concurring judgment of these distinguished scientists do not by any means stand alone. Everybody who has examined thestibject from the standpoint of nat onai defense, and whose opinion is entitled to consideration, is equally emphatic, 3158 12 whereas not a strategist of experience and recognized ability has ever presented an opinion contrary to the expressions which I have taken the liberty to quote. Whatever views members may have upon other phases of the subject, unquestionably from a military standpoint the acquisition of the Havraiian Islands stands b3fore Congress as a measure equal, if not superior, in im- portance and urgency to the construction of the Nicaraguau Canal. Mr. Speaker, I have a prof ound respect and an instinctive feeling of deference for the opinions of the distinguished ex-Secretary of State who has just retired to private life after a career unsur- passed by that of any American statesman for usefulness and wis- dom; but I can not agree with his contention that the Government of the United States has an indefeasible title to Pearl Harbor, ir- respective of the maintenance or abrogation of the reciprocity treaty now existing. The grant of an usufructory interest in that harbor was made in consideration of the provisions of that treaty, not in perpetuity, but constructively during the life of the treaty. It is a part of the treaty, and in my judgment is insep- arable from it. Its abrogation fprminates all of its subsisting pro- visions, and it would be a violent assumption to hold that the rights vested thereby would continue to exist after the basis upon which they stand had been destroyed by the action of the Ameri- can Government. I can not see any validity in the proposition that the American Government can exercise its right to terminate the treaty in twelve months after notice, and notwithstanding that termina- tion hold on to one of the chief considerations of the grant. To do so, even if we had the power to do it, would be a manifest fraud on the Hawaiian Government, and could never find sup- port and countenance in the moral sense of the American people. No such proposition ever entered into the negotiations which cul- minated in that convention, or in its renewal, nor has it ever ex- isted, nor does it exist to-day in the understanding of the Ha- waiian Government. Such is the statement not only of the pre- mier of the Hawaiian Government, but also of Mr. Bayard, late Secretary of State. If that group of islands shoitld pass by voluntary cession into the sovereignty of a European state, or, through the operations of the peaceful invasion of the Japanese, which during the last ten years has increased that population from 2,700 to nearly if not quite 32,000, should become directly or indirectly absorbed into the Japanese system, I can not for one moment believe that any such pretension of the United States to the ownership of Pearl Harbor would be admitted by any court of international arbitra- tion. In the face of such conditions, either the one or the other of which is more than a prol^ability, the assertion of the Menroe doc- trine or of an exclusive proprietary interest in Pearl Harbor would inevitably precipitate another foreign war. Irrespective of any other consideration, the avoidance of such a risk is, in my judg- ment, of transcendent importance. Mr. Speaker, the splendid domain of the Hawaiian Islands, sitn- ailed within the arc of our existing possessions, is to-day offered with all rights of sovereignty to the United States as the free gift of the existing and established Government, together with all pub- lic lands and property, and with no condition whatsoever beyond the assumption of the public debt to the maximum amount of $4,000,000. If ac-cepted by the passage of this measiire, that great entrepot, lying in the highway of the future commerce of the a-158 13 East and the West, will psaccfully pass into the possession of tho American people, assuring to them perpetual immunity from hos- tile attack, a stratej^'ic position of incalculable valne in time of war. a harbor of refuse in storm or cahmiity, and a magniticent supply station for our Navy and merchant marine through all the exigencies of onr country's future. If. on the contrary. Congress shuts the door upon this tender, the Hawaiian Islands must of necessity pass under foreign domin- ion. Not one of the constituent elements of the Hawaiian popu- lation is suffici ntly strong to maintain for any prolonged per.od of time an independent form of government against internecine contiict or foreign au'gress.on. If we re. me to extend our own sovere gnty and protection, the Un'ted States can not. with any showot .iustice or sanction of right recognizable by other nations, invoke the principles of the Monroe doctrine against a voluntary treaty of cession to Great Britain or to Germany or to France, which may become necessary to the preservation of the rights and the protect on ot the lives of the Hawaiian people against domestic or foreign violence. But whether as a matter of principle the Monroe doctrine could be applied or whether it could not be, yet, nevertheless, in the ab- sence of a voluntary cession to a European power, the gravitation to Japan and finally absorption by that country will be the inevi- table destiny of the Hawaiian people. Under the constitution of that Republic it is easy to be seen that it is only a matter of time when the Japanese population may lawfully acquire control of all the legislative and administrative functions of the Government, in which event the transition to a colonial system, autonomous in Its character, but yielding allegiance to the Emperor, would be altogether too imperceptible to justify interference at any par- ticular period of time, or even to render interference possible without a war with that Empire. Thus, by a movement similar to those which have hei-etofore characterized the migration of na- tions, there would be eventually precipitated that greatest of all conceivable calamities, the planting of an Asiatic population and the founding of an Asiatic cult two-thirds of the stretch across Mr.' Speaker, another point of contention against this measure is that by the acquisition of these islands we will largely increase our coast line necessary to be defended, and therelore the acqui- sition would be a source of weakness rather than of strength. There is no force in this contention. Pearl Harbor is the only landlocked harbor in the entire Hawaiian group, and the only place that could be made available as a naval base. In the pos- session of the United States, no foreign enemy could maintain a lodgment anvwhere on the entire coast line for any purpose what- soever. Susceptible of being made as impregnab.e as Gibraltar, it has the superior advantage of being a refuge agamst storm as well as against superior forces, while it is a coign of vantage from which every trade route in the Southern Pacific can be flanked, giving unparalleled facilities for the assailing or detend- ing commerce, and absolutely dominating not only the island coast line, but also every ocean highway from Alaska to the Equator. After traversing all the waters of the globe. I know of no posi- tion which can be so cheaply fortifii d or maintained, which will give to the Government so great an influence in maritime com- merce, and which can be made so tremendously effective in the possible conflicts of the future. uM58 14 Aside from strategic considerations, common justice to a weak and defenseless neighbor demands ttaat the United States shall either recognize the neuti-ality obligations of a noncombatant or else shall eliminate those obligations from the forum ot future con- tentions by an incorporation into our own system. We are to-day using the Island of Oahu as a base of supplies and a naval station in open detiauce of the well-recognized laws governing neutral powers and in absolute contradiction of our own demand upon all other nations in the world. Can anyone doubt that the principles of the Alabama case would determine the judgment of any court of international arbitration if a call for damages should be herearter made upon Hawaii by the Government of Spain? Can anyone doubt that the collection of a judgment by seizure of Hawaiian revenues, or the occu- pation of Hawaiian territory until satisfaction was rendered, would be upheld by European nations in spite of the Monroe dec- trine unless the United States paid the award? Our action al- ready taken is absolutely indefensible upon any other theory than that the treaty already concluded gives quasi jurisdictional rights pending ratification. The annexation of Hawaii is wholly disconnected from and in- dependent of any questions growing out of our contest with Spain. Repeating what I have heretofore said, this subject in one form or another has been before the American people and before Con- gress for over fifty years, and it would have been accomplished long ago had it not been for the contentions of political parties and the overshadowing exigencies of the civil war. No proposi- tion of colonial establishment has ever entered into the negotia- tions of the two Governments. The treaty of 1893 and also that of 1897 both provided that the Hawaiian Islands shall be incorporated into the territory of the United States as an integral part thereof, and shall be known as the Territory of Hawaii, and as such shall be governed by such laws as Congress shall enact. The undertaking to connect this subject with the fate of the Philippine Islands, of Puerto Rico, is simply and solely a makeshift of the opposition to defeat this measure by the sinuous arts of par- liamentar}' tactics, notwithstanding the fact thata vast majority of the American people have already substantially voted for annex- ation and that a majority of both Houses of this Congress are waiting to vote for it at the earliest possible opportunity. Speaking for myself, Mr. Speaker, although for twenty years I have been convinced of the wisdom of this proceeding from every standpoint of view, present and future, yet, laying aside all other considerations which relate to commercial development and the progress of civilization, it is enough for me to know that the President of the United States, charged with the responsibility of prosecuting this war to a successful issue, regards the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands as a military necessity. With that knowl- edge I will give him my loyal support, and I will never consent that this session of Congress shall adjourn until these resolutions have been fully acted upon. Mr. Speaker, there is no novelty in the objections which are urged against this measure. They were urged against the pur- chase of Louisiana in 1803. The Federalists of that day chal- lenged the constitutionality of the acquisition, and even Mr. Jef- ferson (luestioned it. But Congress and the Supreme Court de- cided otherwise. They were urged against the annexation of Texas by the Abolitionists of the North and by many statesmen of the South. Whole tomes of statistics were summoned to prove 24,58 15 that the heterogeneous population gathered within those districts coiild never be ampiiorated, and would prove to bo an eternal menace to our republican institutions. But they were annexed nevertheless, and to-day thoy are teeming with wealth, inte.li- gence, and industrial energy. They were urged against the ac- qui-^ition of New Mexico and California, and one of the greatest Si eeches Webster ever made was an invective against that terra incognita. Nevertheless, nearly S'JO.OOO.OOO was given as the price of that territorv.aud it has ja-oven to bo an inexhaustible store- house of miner;"il and agricultural wealth. Thi^y were urged still more vehemently a-ainst the {lurchase of Alaska, and Mr. Seward was charged with political lunacy lor paying eight millions of good money for a region of eternal icebergs. But. Mr. iSpea'er. in all these so-called uneonstitutional, irrational, and unstatesniaiilike performances we builded wiser than we knew, and out of tliose vast regions of tropical jungle and arctic waste a great nation has grown up to subdue the sterile places of the earth and to bless humanity. Who to-chiy would turn backward this wonderful march of progress? W" ho would not rather carry it forward, re- lying upon the insjiirations and the strength of American intelli- gence and upon the providence of Almighty God? Mr. Speaker, it is urged that the people of the Hawaiian Islands are incapable of self-government, and therefore annexation must necessarily be hostile to the best interests of the American people. Of the present constituent elements of Hawaiian population, the Chinese, numbering nearly 23,000, can safely be regarded as only temporary sojourners in the islands. With the application of American laws aga nst further immigration, the immediate outgo 01 this element wdl begin; and in a comparatively short period of time they will become greatly reduced in point of numbers, if they do not entirely disappear. The Japanese are fairly good ma- terial for future citizenship. They are acqu'sitive of knowledge, industrious and economical, and easily molded in the forms and usages of the society in which they locate. Taking the native Hawaiians, Portuguese, the British, the Ger- mans, and the Americans into consideration, the percentage of intelligence existing at the present time among these elements is as large as that which exists in any of the new sections of our own country. Out of 15,191 Portuguese residents, 48.8 per cent were born on the islands. The percentage of industrials is over 91 per cent of the entire working population, fully up to the show- ing of the most advanced nations of the world. Of 9;i,l0') people over G years of age. Go.O per cent are able to read and write. Ex- cluding the Portuguese, the Japanese, and the Chmese, the per- centage of those able to read and write rises to nearly 86 per cent. The percentage of children attending school is still more re- markable. The total number of children within the school age- viz. 6 to 15— was reported in isy» to be 14,280, out of which the school attendants were 18,744, or 9(5.2 per cent, an increase of nearly 15 per cent over 1890and over 25 per cent over 1884. While the natives of full Hawaiian blood appear to be decreasing, the native born of mixed Hawaiian stock is very largely on the in- crease, such births rising from 1,568 in 18'i0 to 2.-590 m 1896, a gain of 65 per cent. The children born in the islands of parents both foreign have increased from 5,018 in 1890 to 8,839 in 1890, a gain of Go per cent. These increases are mostly among Hawaiians, Europeans, and Americans, showing the rise of a new stock thoroughly amena- ble to the influences of Anglican civilization, into which it is rap- 3458 mt!^!^"V ""- ^UNbKtb^ 013 717 904 16 idly mersing year by year. The contention, therefoi'e, that there is anj' antagonism, physical, moral, intellectual, or social, between the people who can be regarded as permanent residents of the Ha- waiian Islands and the people of the United States is no more valid than the early contention that the people of Lomsiai'a, Texas. New Mexico, and California would never coalesce with the Anglo-Saxon popiilation of the original States. COMMERCIAL CONSIDERATIONS. Mr. Speaker, I have been considering this measure more par- ticularly from the standpoint of the proposition that the acquisi- tion of the Hawaiian Islands at this time is necessary for the ].roi)er protection of the Pacific coast. A word or two upon the commercial side of this question as it relates to the future pros- perity of the United States. For a quarter of a century the de- maud has come from every quarter of our country for the enlarge- ment of our foreign commerce, and yet during all that time not a single measure of substantial importance has ever been enacted by Congress or by any commercial body of the United States which constit utes a basis upon which that enlargement can proceed. Outside of Honolulu and the cities of Mexico and (iaudalajara there is not an American office of exchange m any foreign port of the Western Hemispliere or in the oriental world where an Ameri- can negotiation can be carried on. Every commercial bill, every loan of money, every mercantile and affreightment contract, has to be negotiated in an English office and pay tribute in one form or another to English enterprise. Everywhere, in Mexico, in Central and South America, in Polynesia, in India, in Ceylon, in the Straits Settlements, in China, in Japan, and even in Hawaii, English institutions exist, founded under the broad, far-reaching policy of the British Government to increase and monopolize every branch of foreign trade, and not until the people of this country outgrow the swaddling clothes bequeathed to them by the narrow policy of "insular isolation" will they ever have a permanent share in the mighty commerce which beats its v/ings in the waves of the broad Pacific. In the face of the universally recognized need of the Nicaragua Canal we have been wasting precious time haggling and splitting hairs over the difference between minimum and maximum esti- mates of cost when the gain to American commerce in every year after its construction will be more than the entire expenditure. The progressive enterprise of the United States, the manufactur- ers of the North, the cotton growers of the South, the farmers of Oregon and California, all demand a short route between the oceans, and the peerless voyage of the Oregon to join the front battle line in our war with Spain emphasizes that demand with an eloquence beyond the power of human speech. The construction of this great waterway connecting the two oceans, following upon the acquisition of the Hawaiian Islands-, and the independence of Cuba, will I'each a consummation not less magnificent than those splendid transactions which in the' early history of our country laid the foundations of national wealth, national power, and national glory, all which have been the wonder of the world and the honorable pride of every Ameri- can citizen. Powerful to resist attack from without, loving peace at home and abroad, this great country will then have reached- the acme of its destiny, and its beneficent influence upon the na- tions and the peoples of the earth will be the glory of the twentieth century. 3458 O