{"1": {"fulltext": "", "height": "3569", "width": "2422", "jp2-path": "annexationofhawa00mill_0001.jp2"}, "2": {"fulltext": "", "height": "3569", "width": "2285", "jp2-path": "annexationofhawa00mill_0002.jp2"}, "3": {"fulltext": "AWEXATIO.X OF THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS.\\nSPEECH\\nHON. DANIEL W. MILLS\\nOF ILLINOIS.\\nHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,\\nWlvnXKSDAV, Juxic 15, 1S9S.\\n\u00e2\u0096\u00a0^v A S H I X o r O .N", "height": "3653", "width": "2253", "jp2-path": "annexationofhawa00mill_0003.jp2"}, "4": {"fulltext": "ii.^13\\n68458", "height": "3569", "width": "2285", "jp2-path": "annexationofhawa00mill_0004.jp2"}, "5": {"fulltext": "SPEEOU\\nOF\\nHON. DANIEL W. MILLS.\\nOn the joint resolution (H. Ros. 259) to provirto for annexing the Ilawaiian\\nIslands to the United States.\\nMr. MILLS said:\\nMr. Speaker: I represent in part one of the p^reatest commer-\\ncial and manufacturing cities of the \u00e2\u0096\u00a0world. 1 do not intend to go\\ndeeply into the subject of political economy nor to discuss fully the\\nso-called doctrines of the early fathers. These arguments have\\nbeen made and most completely answered, making it necessary for\\nme, in the fulfillment of the duty I owe my constituents, to only\\nrefer to the great benefit the commercial interests of this country\\nwould receive bj the annexation of Hawaii.\\nI have never been able to understand, Mr. Speaker, why every\\nmovement which is destined to bring other countries within the\\nsphere of our commercial influence should be characterized as a\\nD departure from the principles of government laid down by the\\n~s fathers of the Republic. One would be led to suppose that these\\nearly fathers, emulating the example of the Chinese, had builded\\na wall around this country high and wide and strong. When a\\ncommercial arrangement is proposed by which we would secure\\nthe trade of South American countries, we are told that we should\\nenter into no entangling alliances. When we would offset the\\nBritish possession of the Suez Canal and the French ownership of\\nthe Panama Canal, horrible results are pictured that come out of\\nthis supposed departure from the teachings of the early fathers.\\nI believe I am safe in saying that nearly every civilized nation\\nhas departments of commerce and manufactures, upon which the\\ngovernment expends a large amount of money in order to extend\\nits trade. France, Germany, and Gx eat Britain never hesitate at\\nany expenditure in order to establish profitable trade relations\\nwith nations of either the Eastern or the Western Hemisphere.\\nThat the early fathers of the Republic were neither the fools nor\\nthe hermits they had been pictured is shown conclusively by the\\nfact that this nation in its infancy astonished the world by the ex-\\npansion of its foreign trade. American-made shiiis swung the Stars\\nand Stripes to the breeze and floated the Union Jack in every port\\nknown to commerce. Over 80 per cent of the foreign trade of this\\ncountry was then carried upon American bottoms; to-day only\\nabout 10 per cent of our trade is so carried.\\nI represent a large commercial district, and the experiences of\\nthe people in that district are not unlike tliose of the commer-\\ncial interests in other sections of the country. It has not been\\na great while since the business men of Chicago, St. Louis,\\nand Cincinnati formed commercial organizations and sent travel-\\n\u00c2\u00bb499 3", "height": "3653", "width": "2253", "jp2-path": "annexationofhawa00mill_0005.jp2"}, "6": {"fulltext": "ing representatives to South America and the Orient. They found\\nthose people all anxious to buy goods in the United States; but\\nthey also found that the merchants of the United States could not\\nprofitably compete with those of Great Britain on account of the\\nadvantages given the English jobbers and manufacturers by rea-\\nson of the treaties made Ijy their Clovernment.\\nChina, Japan, Australia, and all of the oriental lands are geo-\\ngraphically closer to the United States than to Great Britain, but\\ncommercially they are at a much greater distance. The commer-\\ncial distance for nonperishable goods is not a question of miles,\\nbut of cost of transportation. The price of coal in the United\\nStates is a little less than the price of coal in England or France,\\nwhile the price of coal in the Pacific islands ranges from \u00c2\u00a710 to\\n$1. a ton. England, France, and Germany own coaling stations\\nat easy steaming distance from each other all the way from Europe\\nto Asiatic shores. Tlie steamship companies keep supplies of coal\\non hand at these stations, and they obtain their coal at actual\\ncost, vrith only the actual cost of transportation added.\\nOn the other hand, the United States having no coaling station\\nbetween the Pacific coast and Japan, and having a long land haul\\nfor coal from the Eastern fields to the Pacific coast, labors under a\\nvery great disadvantage. Our steamship companies must pay\\ndouble the price for coal that it costs the English and French com-\\npanies. The difference in the coal alone would make a fine profit\\non the transportation. The distance is too great for an American\\nvessel to be supplied with sufficient coal to carry it to Japan or\\nChina without replenishing the bunkers.\\nThe result can easily be seen by a study of our official reports\\non commercial relations. The port of Shanghai is naturally tribu-\\ntary to the Pacific coast, and yet the trade of Shanghai has grown\\nwith Great Britain from $230,000,000 in 1894 to $320,000,000 in\\n1897. It fell with the United States during the same period from\\n\u00c2\u00a7700,000,000 to $300,000,000. The trade of New South Wales with\\nthe United States has fallen from \u00c2\u00a7400,000,000 to $100,000,000.\\nThe United States opened up Japan to the world, and now France,\\nGreat Britain, and Germany each sell her more goods than we do.\\nIn the miitation of events arising out of circumstances which\\nthe United States could not control there has been offered to iis\\nwithout the expenditure of a dollar the complete control of the\\nPacific Ocean. We have been compelled by the fortunes of war\\nto seize the Philippine Islands, and the Carolines, belonging to\\nthe same iiower, will unquestionably fall into oiir hands. The\\nHawaiian group has been offered us as a gift. If we accept the\\ngood that Providence seeks to bestow upon us, we own the Ha-\\nwaiian Islands, 2,100 miles from San Francisco; we own the Car-\\nolines, 2,. 3O0miles from Hawaii; weown the Philippines, l,900niile3\\nfrom the Carolines and but 900 miles from Hongkong. We have\\ncommercial stations at easy steaming distance from each other,\\nextending entirely across the Pacific Ocean. If the Government,\\nin connection with Nicaragua and Costa Rica, should build the\\nNicaraguan Canal, the coal for American ships would cost very\\nmuch less than it now costs to ship to Great Britain, France, and\\nGermany.\\nThe Republican party, under the beneficent influences of the\\npolicy of in otection to American manufactures, has built up oiir\\nindustrial interests until they excite the envy and the admiration\\nOf the entire world. But so far not a dollar has been expended,", "height": "3569", "width": "2285", "jp2-path": "annexationofhawa00mill_0006.jp2"}, "7": {"fulltext": "not a iiipasure tried for tlie extension of commerce or the upbuikl-\\nins? of the commercial interests. We have expended hundreds of\\nmillions on the rivers of the South and West in order that the\\nfarmers might have cheap transportation for their products. Tho\\ncommercial interests have been incidentally benefited by the bet-\\nterment of the condition of the masses of the people. But directly\\nwe have done nothing to foster and protect the vast commercial\\ninterests of this country.\\nIn protecting the laboring men against competition with the\\npauper labor of Europe we have done well; in protecting tlie\\nfarmer against ruinous transportation charges we have also done\\nwell. Xow come the great commercial interests and demand at\\nour hands that we accept a gift that has been freely offered us in\\norder that they may compete with the commercial houses of the\\nOld World. What can we say to these people if we refuse? Shall\\nwe tell them that the policy of this Government is to contract and\\nnot to expand our trade? Shall we tell these people that the\\nUnited States Government is the only civilized nation on earth\\nthat has no regard to her commercial interests?\\nWe have been called a nation of traders, a nation of shop-\\nkeepers, and yet it has been purely American pluck and enterprise VA\\nthat have caused our trade to grow into anything like large pro-\\nportions. We have no department of Government taking care of\\nthe interests of our commercial men. We maintain no national\\ncommercial clubs. We pay no commercial bounties. Great Brit-\\nain, France, and Germany have all these features, and our com-\\nmercial interests suffer abroad not so much from competition with\\nforeign firms as from competition with foreign governments.\\nWe threw away our opportunity to control the trade of Central\\nand South America; and in the name of the great commercial\\ninterests which I have the honor in part to i-epresent I protest\\nagainst allowing this golden opportunity to escape for us to secure\\nAvithout cost the vast commerce of the Pacific islands and the\\nOrient.\\nWe are told by the Navy Department, we are told by the naval\\nexperts, and for once in the history of the United States the line\\nand the staff of the Navy have agreed, that the Hawaiian Islands\\nare absolutely necessary for the pi-otection of onr Pacific coast.\\nI care nothing for finespun arguments on the theory of political\\neconomy. I find that every writer on the law of nations or the\\nlaw of political economy agrees that with nations, as with indi-\\nviduals, self-preservation is the first law of nature. I find that\\nthe law of self-preservation rises superior to all other laws. We\\nare told by every man who knows that this supreme law abso-\\nlutely declares that we take possession of these islands.\\nSo greatly convinced of this are our military and naval boards\\nof strategy, tho President, who is Commander in Chief of the\\nArmy and Navy, and the General in charge of the Army that they\\nare reported to have agreed that in case this legislation is not en-\\nacted, it will be absolutely necessary to take military charge of the\\nHawaiian Islands in order to protect our Pacific coast. In oppo-\\nsition to the statement that the law of self-preservation requires\\nthe possession of these islands we have only the theories of mem-\\nbers of the House who have made no special study of naval and\\nmilitary affairs. This is not a time in the history of the liuited\\nStates when we can put aside necessity to discuss the theories of\\npolicy.", "height": "3653", "width": "2253", "jp2-path": "annexationofhawa00mill_0007.jp2"}, "8": {"fulltext": "6\\nIt is a time wlieu we must listen to those whom we have edu-\\ncated at great expense at Annapolis and who have had actual\\nexperience in naval matters, and as to those questions which in-\\nvolve naval affairs we mnst to a great extent trust to their judg-\\nment. They say. not that we need these islands, but that we\\nreouire them; we reqnire them just as much, in their judgment,\\nas we do the harbor of Santiago. When the military necessities\\nof the war required that they bombard Santiago, they did not ask\\nCongress for permission, but commenced the bombardment.\\nWhile the possession of Hawaii is just as important, in their judg-\\nment, a little more time is allowable, and Congress therefore\\npasses upon the qirestion of a permanent occupation. But if Con-\\ngress should defeat this resolution, the Navy otticers would have\\nthe right to take possession of Hawaii as a military necessity.\\nThere is another feature of this question which I will refer to\\nvery briefly. In considering the matter of annexing an outlying\\ndependency, it is important to look to the economic conditions of\\nthe countries about to be annexed. Is that country capable of\\nbecoming a part of a republic? What are its products, and what\\neffect would it have upon the products we already raise? What\\nare the habits of the people?\\nThe fact that these people are capable of governing themselves\\nis shown by their having done so for four years under a provi-\\nsional form of government. They have sufficiently demonstrated\\ntheir capabilities in that direction. Their revenues equal their\\nexpenditures, they have maintained their public credit unimpaired,\\nand have developed rapidly in wealth and population. Their cap-\\nital city, Honolulu, is well paved, well lighted, supplied with an\\nexcellent car service, has a most satisfactory common-school sys-\\ntem, and will compare favorably with any city of the same popu-\\nlation in the United States, They have telegraph, telephone, and\\nrailroad service throughout the island, and maintain a postal\\nsavings-bank system, the deposits of which prove that the masses\\nof the people are thrifty, industrious, and economical. The rec-\\nords of the courts show that in morality the people will compare\\nfavorably v.nth those of the United States.\\nNow we come to the products. They raise no wheat, practi-\\ncally no corn, oats, rye, or barley. In the cereals they do not\\ncome into competition with the agriculture of the United States.\\nThey have vast areas of land adapted to the raising of sugar.\\nThe product of the United States in sugar lacks $100,000,0UU an-\\nnually of being sufficient to supply the wants of our own people.\\nTherefore, the addition of a large area of sugar-producing land\\ncan not be otherwise than beneficial. They raise a high grade of\\ncoffee. Our Department of Agriculture has expended large sums\\nof money in vain to try to introduce the coffee plant into this\\ncountry. We have no coffee lands, and the addition of coffee\\nlands could not be otherwise than beneficial. They raise a great\\ndeal of rice. In some of our Southern districts we produce a con-\\nsiderable (luantity of rice, but we have never yet succeeded in\\nraising as much as we could use, and consequently the addition\\nof rice lands Avould be very acceptable. They raise bananas, and\\nthe United States imports large quantities of bananas.\\nFor many years we have been experimenting with different\\nkinds of silkworm, in order to produce native silk. In Louisiana\\nthese experiments have been partially successful. The silk in-\\ndustry has never been developed in Hawaii, but those who have\\nai99", "height": "3569", "width": "2285", "jp2-path": "annexationofhawa00mill_0008.jp2"}, "9": {"fulltext": "r\\nmade a study of the subject are very positive in their belief that\\nthe worms would thrive as well in those islands as in China and\\nJapan. If they are right, it would add to the industries of this\\ncountry one of the greatest lines of manufacture that could 1)e\\nestablished here.\\nThere is not a line of industry, agricultural or industrial, in\\nwhich the Hawaiian Islands come into competition with the\\nIjinted States. Everything that we receive through the annex-\\nation of Hawaii is an addition to our resources. Raising our own\\nsugar, our own coffee, and onr own rice, with a cliinafe similar\\nto that of many of the Oriental countries, a location adapted to\\nthe produce and manufacture of those articles which the people\\nacross the Pacific require, we would be in a peculiarly happy con-\\ndition because we would be enabled to more tlioroughlv satisfy\\ntheir wants than any other nation on earth.\\nMr. Speaker, I believe in giving due deference to the policies\\nwhich have been laid down for our guidance by the illustrious\\nstatesmen of the past. I believe in being verv careful not to en-\\ncroach upon the provisions of the Federal Constitution. But, Mr.\\nSpeaker, no statesman of the past ever said or intimated that our\\nterritory should not be extended where, in the judgment of our\\nnaval and military officers, the law of self-prtservation required\\nits extension. The Constitution is silent upon the subject, e^ept\\nthat it gives Congress the power to create new States.\\nThe United States Supreme Court, construing that part of the\\nConstitution, justified the extension of territory beyond that\\nowned by the United States when the Constitution was adopted\\nIf we could constitutionally purchase the province of Louisiana\\nCalifornia, Nevada, and New Mexico, and Alaska, which is not\\ncontiguous to the main body of the United States, and annex\\nTexas, there is no limitation, so far as the Constitution is con-\\ncerned, upon the judgment of Congress, and we can take posses-\\nsion of any territory that the development of time may render\\nnecessaiy to the development of the United States.\\n3491)", "height": "3653", "width": "2253", "jp2-path": "annexationofhawa00mill_0009.jp2"}, "10": {"fulltext": "LIBRARY OF CONGRESS\\n013 903 963 4\\nHoUingier\\npH S5\\nma. Run F03.2193", "height": "3759", "width": "2452", "jp2-path": "annexationofhawa00mill_0010.jp2"}}