{"1": {"fulltext": "\u00e2\u0096\u00a08 7", "height": "4891", "width": "3200", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0001.jp2"}, "2": {"fulltext": "7", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0002.jp2"}, "3": {"fulltext": "HAWAII.\\nSPEECH\\nOF\\nHON. R. F. 0ROUSSARD,\\nOF LOUISIANA,\\nHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,\\nJUNE 13t, 1898\\nWASHINGTON,\\nI898.", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0003.jp2"}, "4": {"fulltext": "V\\n72943", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0004.jp2"}, "5": {"fulltext": "x^\\\\\\nSPEECH\\nOF\\nHON. R. F. BROUSSAIID\\nThe House having under consideration the joint resolution (II. Res.*239) to\\nprovide for annexing the Hawaiian Islands to the United States-\\nMr. BROUSS ARD said\\nMr. Speaker: In the discussion of the project advanced by the\\npending resolution it is evident that we are not occupied with the\\nbenefits that are to accrue to the people of Hawaii, but our con-\\ncern is how our people are to be affected. I take this to be the\\nsole question at issue with us. I shall make no attempt to con-\\nvince those who in this or any other matter of public import assume\\nthe position that the policy of our Government should seek to\\nbenefit any people save our own. Those who argue that we should\\nannex Hawaii because it will result beneficially to the people of\\nthe islands will not be heard patiently by me, nor shall I stoop to\\nargue the matter with them. The advantage or disadvantage to\\nthem is a question of supreme indifference to me. Let theni look\\nto their own interests.\\nThe greatest good to the greatest number of the American\\npeople should be the inexorable rule of every American, in or out\\nof Congress, in the solution of all public problems.\\nI therefore lay down the proposition as self-evident that it is not\\nonly our right but our highest duty to consider no other but our\\nown interests in discussing this project.\\nAccepting this as the true criterion by which we are to be guided\\nin considering this resolution, it necessarily follows that with those\\nwho advocate annexation rests the burden of proving that we shall\\nbe benefited by annexation.\\nBut before entering into a discussion of the advantages or dis-\\nadvantages to accrue to us through annexation, I desire to empha-\\nsize the fact that, in my opinion, the House is without power to\\npass upon this question in the shape presented.\\nGenerally speaking, a nation may acquire territory by con-\\nquest, by purchase, or by discovery. The framers of our Consti-\\ntution laid down the rule of action, however, that we may, apart\\nfrom the modus operandi just mentioned, acquire territory by\\ntreaty. Under this provision Jefferson negotiated the purcnase\\nof Louisiana and the Northwest from France in 1803. Under\\nPresident Monroe, in 1819, in the same way we acquired Florida\\nfrom Spain, and during the Presidency of Mr. Johnson, in 1870,\\nAlaska was ceded to us by Russia. Upper California, including\\nwhat is now California, Nevada, Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico,\\nand Arizona, we acquired in 1848, under Mr. Polk s Administra-\\ntion, as a result of our war with Mexico. Our title to this latter\\nterritory is by force of conquest.\\nWe purchased Alaska from Russia in 1867. The title was con-\\nveyed by treaty. The only other territory acquired by us was\\nTexas, in 184-5, under President Tyler s Administration. Texas, an\\nindependent republic, was admitted into the Union a3 a new\\nState. It was never annexed in the true sense of the word, nor\\ncan it be quoted as a precedent for this scheme, for it is not\\nhere sought to admit Hawaii into the Union as a new State. No-\\nwhere in the Constitution do I find authority vested in this House\\n3452 3", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0005.jp2"}, "6": {"fulltext": "to acquire territory, except to admit new States into the Union,\\nand then this authority is exercised conjunctively with the\\nSenate.\\nThe Senate alone is vested with power to ratify or reject trea-\\nties having for their purpose acquisition of territory. The terri-\\ntory of Upper California, then, was obtained by conquest; Loui-\\nsiana, Florida, and Alaska were acquired under the treaty-making\\npower, and Texas was admitted into the Union under the express\\npower given Congress to admit new States. But I shall not fur-\\nther deal with this phase of the question. Abler men have long\\nsince settled it in the debate that led to the admission of Texas\\ninto the Union.\\nBut lest, in their greed to acquire foreign territory, the advo-\\ncates of annexation should, by brute force, brush aside this con-\\nstitutional plea, as they evidently propose to do, I shall return to\\na discussion of the merits of the controversy.\\nI can conceive of but three ways that we can be benefited by the\\nacquisition of any territory that is, from a commercial standpoint,\\nor from a military standpoint, or from a political standpoint.\\nNow, in annexing Hawaii, shall we be benefited in a commer-\\ncial way? Let us see.\\nSince 1875 our Government has been in commercial treaty with\\nHawaii. Our trade relations with her under the treaty make\\nabsolutely certain the benefits or disadvantages which must fol-\\nlow annexation. Under the treaty the products of the islands are\\nplaced on our markets free of duty, while in return the duties of\\nmany of the manufactured articles of the United States are re-\\nmitted us. Our present trade relations w\\\\th Hawaii, therefore,\\nare exactly what they will be after annexation, if we commit the\\nblunder of annexing. Now, have we lost or gained by this ex-\\nchange of commodities under the treaty?\\nI here attach a comparative statement of our export and import\\ntrade with Hawaii:\\nTRADE OF THE UNITED STATES WITH HAWAIIAN ISLANDS.\\nTotal exports and imports of merchandise.\\nYear ending\\nJune 30\u00e2\u0080\u0094\\nExports.\\nDomes-\\ntic.\\nFor-\\neign.\\nTotal.\\nImports.\\nFree.\\nDuti-\\nable.\\nTotal.\\nExcess\\nof im-\\nports.\\n1875\\n1876\\n1877\\n1878\\n1879\\n1880\\n1881\\n1882\\n1883\\n1884\\n1885\\n1886\\n1887\\n1888\\n1889\\n1890\\n1891\\n1892\\n1893\\n1894\\n1895\\n1896.\\n1897\\n3452~\\n$621,\\n724,\\n1,109,\\n1,683,\\n2,288,\\n1,985,\\n2,694,\\n3,272,\\n3,683,\\n446,\\n2, 709,\\n3,115.\\n3,520\\n3,025:\\n3,336;\\n4,608!\\n935!\\n3;662:\\n2: 717,\\n3; 217\\n3,618\\n3,928:\\n4,622\\n$40,\\n54,\\n163,\\n52,\\n86,\\n100,\\n83,\\n78,\\n92,\\n77,\\n78,\\n76,\\n101,\\n59,\\n39,\\n104,\\n171,\\n119,\\n110,\\n88,\\n74,\\n57,\\n67,\\n779,\\n1,272,\\n1,736,\\n2,374,\\n086,\\n2,778,\\n3,350,\\n3,776,\\n3.523,\\n2, 787,\\n3, 192,\\n3,622,\\n3,085,\\n3,375,\\n4,711,\\n5,107,\\n3, 781,\\n2,827,\\n3,306,\\n3,723,\\n$168, 771\\n192,071\\n2,641,628\\n3,243,988\\n4.565,918\\n5; 517, 737\\n7,621,690\\n8,195,937\\n7,900,000\\n8,817,067\\n9,741,924\\n0291 9,892,889\\n20311,050,038\\n187\\n057\\n5203,985,707\\n494 4,690,075\\n12,832,910\\n12,309,758\\n13,865,648\\n8,062,076\\n9,087,856\\n9,969,\\n7,870,304\\n11,743,343\\n13,663,012\\n058,420\\n184,610\\n164,969\\n37,202\\n13,950\\n40,526\\n15,263\\n24,604\\n42,524\\n25,965\\n40,430\\n63,783\\n29, 186\\n10,341\\n14,830\\n4,150\\n29,949\\n13,806\\n58,911\\n95,336\\n18,657\\n14,361\\n24,787\\n227, 191\\n376,681\\n550,335\\n678,830\\n257,938\\n606,444\\n533,000\\n646,294\\n238,461\\n925,965\\n857,497\\n805,707\\n922,075\\n060,379\\n817,740\\n313,908\\n895,597\\n075,882\\n146,767\\n065,317\\n888,961\\n757,704\\n687,\\n$565,027\\n597,424\\n1,277,386\\n942,731\\n883,020\\n2,520,274\\n2,754,928\\n4,295,519\\n4,462,396\\n4,402,612\\n6,069,575\\n6,613,009\\n6,300,046\\n7,975,176\\n9,472,079\\n7,602,491\\n8,788,385\\n4,294,254\\n6,319,104\\n6,759,130\\n4,165,904\\n7,771,997\\n8,997,724", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0006.jp2"}, "7": {"fulltext": "A mere glance at these figures shows that for every dollar s\\nworth of merchandise that we have been permitted to place upon\\nthe Hawaiian market without paying duty to the Hawaiian Gov-\\nernment the people of the islands have been allowed to use our\\nmarkets free of duty for from two to three dollars worth of their\\ngoods.\\nIn other words, for every dollar s worth of advantage we have\\nsecured from them under the treaty we have paid them from two\\nto three dollars; and in doing this we have placed American toil-\\ners, in field and factory, in direct competition with the cheap con-\\ntract labor of Hawaii.\\nStrange to say, this scheme finds its greatest supporters on\\nthe other side of this Chamber, where men most prate of the pro-\\ntection of American labor. It appears, too, from these statistics\\nthat a large percentage of the goods exported by us to Hawaii\\nis of foreign manufacture, so that American laborers are greater\\nsufferers from the treaty than at first is apparent.\\nTo adopt this resolution would be to perpetuate these condi-\\ntions and to continue the competition between American and\\nAsiatic labor, not in the markets of the world, but to invite the\\ncompetition at home on an equal footing with us.\\nMr. Speaker, I have the honor to represent the greatest sugar-\\nproducing district in the United States. Rice within the last\\nfew years has become a staple product in my district.\\nThese two articles are practically the only products raised for\\nexportation in the Sandwich Islands. Both commodities are ad-\\nmitted into this country under the present treaty free of duty.\\nAnnexation would forever keep our markets free for the admis-\\nsion of both of these articles. Representing, as I do, a district\\nwhose main dependence is in these two products, I take it that I\\nhave the right to voice the opinion and to advocate the rights of\\nmy people in opposition to this scheme.\\nLaborers, mechanics, and chemists in the sugar fields and refin-\\neries of Louisiana receive good wages to-day. On the rice farms\\nand in the rice mills of southwest Louisiana men find employment\\nreadily and at remunerative figures. There no strikes are heard,\\nmenacing the security of the community. No injunctions are re-\\nsorted to to coerce one man to starve that his more fortunate\\nneighbor might enrich himself. There the shrill and discordant\\nvoice of anarchy is never heard. There there is contentment and\\nhappiness and plenty. Men enjoy more independence and liberty\\nthere than anywhere on earth. Your proposition is to strike a\\ndeathly blow at all these blessings.\\nIn the great West men are learning to appreciate the possibil-\\nities of sugar-beet culture. Up to recently it seemed to be the one\\nambition of the Secretary of Agriculture to advance and foster\\nthe sugar-beet industry in the section of the country from which\\nhe hails. We in Louisiana felt that the beet sugar would at no\\ndistant time supplant cane sugar, because it can be produced\\ncheaper, but we welcomed our neighbors in this field of operation.\\nTheir competition was to be American competition amongst Amer-\\nican citizens, white man competing against white man. We were\\nglad to meet them, and we would have rejoiced at their success;\\nbut what do you propose to do with this budding hope of the West?\\nSuffocate it, stifle it, strangle it, together with its older brother of\\nthe South; and for what and for whom? For a trade in which\\nthe American people lose three times as much as they gain. For\\na race of negroes, of Chinese, half-breeds, and lepers.\\n3452", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0007.jp2"}, "8": {"fulltext": "What have these done that they should be paid to receive better\\ntreatment at our father s house than we, the children, should have?\\nPause and consider before you take such a course. The step into\\nthe abyss is easily taken once taken it can never be retraced. For\\nall time to come, should you annex Hawaii, must my people sur-\\nrender to these people their heritage and the West her hopes of\\nadding to her already great achievements in agriculture? And\\nthe surrender will be all the more mortifying when in return we\\nshall receive a mess of pottage.\\nBut, says the Secretary of Agriculture and the advocates of an-\\nnexation here, you overestimate the possibilities of sugar and rice\\nin the Hawaiian Islands. Let us see if this is so.\\nIn Hawaii, the Philippines, and the West Indies sugar cane is\\nindigenous to the soil. Here it is not. Sugar can there be raised,\\naccording to governmental statistics, at a cost of li cents per\\npound. Here it costs nearly 4 cents. To the sugar trust, which\\ncontrols the entire imported output, transportation is cheap.\\nHow long then, I ask, can our people maintain this unequal and\\nunjust competition? You great protectors of American labor and\\nAmerican industries, answer me this, if you dare.\\nThe following is an official statement:\\n3453", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0008.jp2"}, "9": {"fulltext": "V\\nft\\ny\\nd\\n\u00e2\u0096\u00a0a\\ns\\nI\\nX\\na\\nA\\no\\ns\\nS\\n3\\n8\\nO\\nbfl\\ns\\nP\\nQQ\\ne\\nIs*\\nX O\\ni^ ^feSggi\\nS8\\n-S\\no x x to x c i\u00e2\u0080\u0094 1 1.-: o co rfnOHdi\\nr- rHCM co wcM o^iCiOO-^iS\\n..a-COiG*\\n1SS\\nir$CM\\n\u00e2\u0080\u00a2S b\\n^dxfi*\\ncm cs os m oo o to oo e i gj a so co co o is co co\\nJ co t-i -v; 5$ 35 5\u00c2\u00a3 \u00c2\u00bbne\u00c2\u00bb \u00c2\u00ab-5 \u00c2\u00abo eo \u00c2\u00ab5 t- 3 co fc- rn os t-i\\nOHtl\u00c2\u00bbH005MHC!HNNCOH^-*K COMH\\nQcxfcvfci T\u00c2\u00bbrT(roft^i roo e\u00c2\u00bbcro4xrrHeoi Coc\u00c2\u00bbL^i^so\\n030mi-H *M\u00c2\u00bblT*!Or .MQO\u00c2\u00bblMt-Ni lOO**\\noj i- o? x t; x co -t -r c to c- t os co\\nO J 1 CO CM T-i O OS CO iO to 1 W KS t- OS CO to\\nQHJJ\u00c2\u00bbrtO)3smHrtHNHOOH-*^MMrfiH\\nQrfc\u00c2\u00abc f^^o^L^coc\u00c2\u00bbG o frHc\u00c2\u00abi roo c\u00c2\u00bbt^*i-reo\\nr-iccc\u00c2\u00bb-*i- xo-co ai.ococoHOioos *co\u00c2\u00bbo\\nX M W O lO i.- X CO i- CC H H H C M X N ffl H\\n.gcnonNxfflst-Hwiosoo^osioaNH\\nis ei co co so csN-n of co w {o dg -^Tt- 1.0 cxf t^ so aTioW\\ng\u00c2\u00a9COSOlSCSr- i--lr-ISOi.-CMlSCO *ICMSO Ot-CMi-ICM\\n^QOi l^ l4 ^\u00c2\u00ab^Tl^^J^as^4 co*coc1?^^^weo^^\u00c2\u00a9^ r-^\\no o o\\n3\u00c2\u00a7\\n1J;\\n5cos\\n\\\\0*4*T-*r- i\\nlOPOCCOX\\nCS t\u00e2\u0080\u0094 CD I\u00e2\u0080\u0094 CS\\n10 25 1- co 00 o\\nS CO CM OS\\nICOOCfttOlO\\nrrt\\n5888!\\nCc cTotOi\\nl-HCOCO\u00c2\u00a9C\\nb- iff CM 1-1 O CS OS\\nlOOIflH^MOO\\n)t-COCOt^-r-|- $i-*ii-\u00c2\u00ab*\\nC) i-Ti-Tof eo w cm 9* N cm r-i\\nSc2\\nt- lO CO CO CM 1\u00e2\u0080\u0094 It- CS t- OS OS 10 e\\nisssmsss ss^s\\ncS^ 1\\nlis\\n\u00c2\u00a9+s\\n\u00c2\u00b0IS\\nS.S81\\ni*\u00c2\u00a3^\\n;8ct3i\\nt-C5COCOt-iO-*\u00c2\u00bb \u00c2\u00a900xri00fc-\\nSOSCSl\u00e2\u0080\u0094 -HiOOOCSt-COi\u00e2\u0080\u0094 I-** CO 00\\nOXt-^iON^nOHCOHSI\\n1 to to OS CS CS CO CO\\nI CO CS CO i- 1\u00e2\u0080\u0094 I CS o\\nt to 10 o co t- m to\\nroto to* cot-rcs ~\u00c2\u00bbc;\\n1\u00e2\u0080\u0094 1 i-H 00 CM OS so s\\nI SO CM t- CM CO t\\nCS IC i-H CO t-\\nCOCiJr-HCOO\\nCO uO CM CO T-i\\nSc25\u00c2\u00a7\\nCMCMCMi-H\\n)Ot-00\\nt\u00c2\u00bbXiO\\n\u00e2\u0080\u009e-T*ptccr. Oto to\\ntScOOi-lCOOCOt-\\nS 0*t- CO CO CM C5~\\n00 CO t- CS t~ -0 t-\\nOCs3 r- t-C005rH\\nco* csr X t-riff co o\\n1 uj 5- to co\\n;co\\nJ? eo *e\u00c2\u00bb \u00c2\u00abs iQfc ^csb--*sotocscomt-\\nQ\u00c2\u00abrlHHf5\u00c2\u00abMM tH\\n_ CMl-CO-\u00c2\u00abt C5rHi-i\\n-f CT CO 0 i.O OS to l.O CC i-t i-H ^H IS i-H tO\\n-*CSCOOC-i *OSOl-L--*i-iCOiC05\u00c2\u00bb0\\n^CiOHO5C5Pl-C0\u00c2\u00abiHCCHTtlCrin\\nL- to 1-1 O CO t- iC to\\nO OS i.O to\\n!-l-CO tO\\nCO 00 L- CO\\nL~?r-lnzB\\nt- 00 os o ^h co n to 1 00 cs -j j co -f o to i\\nt-t-t^oocococosococ/jaoeocooscscsoscscscsos\\nXXXXXXXXXXXMXXXXXXXXX\\nS 2\\n2oo-^\\n-flcs\\nr=3 2\\nfl\\nO r-\\nf-l^H\\nP,\\nX fc\u00c2\u00a3 M\\n\u00c2\u00abw S\\nOt\\n^^CM\\n2\\n\u00c2\u00a9r-H* 1\\n\u00c2\u00a72^\\n\u00e2\u0096\u00a0is?\\n0S r ,CO\\na\\nCgrH\\no^\\nm\\na\\nc3^^\\n1\\nE3\\n*t\u00c2\u00bb-s\\nO\\nXCJH\\n9\\n1\\nrj O\\nT3\\n5\\nfH-S\\n4J 0\\ntJD\u00c2\u00a9\\nM\\nfe .a^\\ny\\nOfld\\na\\nc!* 3\\n1\\nooS gg\\nw g c3\\n3 2 Sd\\n2 60 ,.S ft\\nfog\u00c2\u00ae \u00c2\u00a9^J\\n8*1 S\u00c2\u00ab\\n\u00c2\u00ab2p21a\\n+a c3 2+3*2\\nstoms\\niian s\\nhas,\\nopic t\\nlated\\ns a\\n5^s\u00c2\u00a9^\\nSos^S\\n-j c^\\ns p.a !o\\n.2\\n3iC2", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0009.jp2"}, "10": {"fulltext": "8\\nOur loss in governmental revenues from this treaty from sugar\\nalone is nearly $60,000,000, while from rice importations five mil-\\nlions more were lost to us. Annexation will perpetuate this con-\\ndition of affairs, and with the continued increase of the produc-\\ntion of sugar on the four islands comprising the coveted territory\\nwe must expect to surrender to these people every year from five\\nto eight million dollars of our revenues, for what? For the pleas-\\nure of paying the national debt of the people of the islands, of\\nprotecting them from foreign invasion, building up their com-\\nmerce, and fortifying their coast.\\nStrange as it may seem, the strongest supporters of this scheme\\nare the men who wrote in their party platform in 1896 these words:\\nResolved, We condemn the present (Democratic) Administration for not\\nkeeping faith with the sugar producers of this country. The Republican\\nparty favors such protection as will lead to the production on American soil\\nof all the sugar which the American people use, and for which they pay\\nother countries more than $100,000,000 annually.\\nIn the face of this solemn declaration, this harrowing condem-\\nnation of the Democratic party, we find the President, elected\\non that platform, advocating this scheme. We find his Secre-\\ntary of Agriculture in one breath urging the West to engage in\\nsugar raising and in the other advocating the annexation of\\nHawaii, with the full knowledge that this must be the ultimate\\ndestruction of that industry. We find the Republican majority\\nof the House committee urging to a man the annexation of these\\nislands. And, finally, we see practically a solid Republican vote\\nback of the resolution.\\nWhy give us a tariff on sugar if you propose to admit free of\\nduty more sugar than the American people consume? Did you\\ngive it to us that the differential in favor of the sugar trust might\\nnot appear isolated? Did you offer us assistance that our destruc-\\ntion might be more keenly felt? Is it another exemplification of\\nthe Greeks bearing gifts? The ancient proverb said that the gods\\nmade blind those whom they would destroy, but you would seem\\nto pet and pamper your victims.\\nBut whenever you confront these modern sleight-of-hand plat-\\nform manipulators with this declaration, they reply that the\\nHawaiian Islands produce too little sugar and rice to affect the\\nAmerican price of either. This same argument was advanced\\nwhen the treaty was being discussed in 1875, yet this treaty stimu-\\nlated the sugar production in the islands fully forty-five fold since\\n1877. The islands then produced 10,183.556 pounds of sugar, while\\nlast year the production was 451,196,980 pounds.\\nBut let us examine this statement more closely. We are great\\nsugar eaters. We consume, next to the English, more sugar than\\nany other people on earth. Our consumption is 64| pounds of\\nsugar per capita per annum. In 1897 we consumed 2,096,263 tons,\\nor a little over 4,000,000,000 pounds. Louisiana produced of this\\n631,699,561 pounds; other American States, 12,475,762 pounds;\\ntotal American production, 644,175,323 pounds. We imported\\nfrom Hawaii, free of duty, 431,196,980 pounds, making a total of\\n1,075,372,303 pounds. This is over 25 per cent of our entire con-\\nsumption.\\nIf we annexed Hawaii and her sister islands and stopped there,\\nperhaps my complaint would be ill-founded. But listen to the\\ntale of woe of the annexationists. First, we simply wanted\\nthe Sandwich Islands because they were necessary to us in our\\nAsiatic trade. In the other Chamber the discussions on this prop-\\n3452", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0010.jp2"}, "11": {"fulltext": "9\\nosition were long and extended. We must have the islands, said\\nthey, because Pearl Harbor, in the Island of Oahu, is necessary\\nfor our defense. In case of war our western coast would be at\\nthe mercy of our enemies. Lo and behold, the war did come, and\\nthe false prophets saw the conditions of their prophecy reversed.\\nNot our coast was in danger, but the enemy s possessions, 5,000\\nmiles farther east. And, with these conditions confronting them,\\nwe find them playing on the other string. We must have the\\nislands, say they now, so as to maintain our possessions in the\\nEast.\\nIt is clear to my mind that the -possession of Hawaii is but the\\nentering wedge to a colonial policy by this Government.\\nThe scheme is not only to possess ourselves of Hawaii, but\\nmaintain sovereignty over the Philippines and Puerto Rico, once\\nthese are captured, as captured they must be in this war. And\\nthen, pursuing the policy further, to subsequently declare we are\\nunable to maintain a stable government in Cuba, and take her,\\ntoo.\\nThat this is the policy of the present Administration is apparent\\neven to the blind.\\nNow, what will all this mean to the sugar and rice industries of\\nthis country?\\nFollowing is our sugar importations from the islands:\\nIslands.\\nPhilippines\\nPuerto Rico.\\nCuba.\\nYear.\\nPounds,\\n1897\\n1888\\n1897\\n1888\\n1897\\n1894\\n72,463,577\\n274,809,392\\n86,607,317\\n115,653,909\\n576,260,997\\n2,127,497,454\\nI have arranged these figures in this shape for this reason: In\\nthe last few years all of these islands have been in revolution.\\nParticularly is this true of Cuba. The result has been that, in\\nCuba at least, little attention has been paid to agriculture. We\\nknow that almost all the sugar factories have been burned either\\nby the insurgents or the Spanish army. Consequently there has\\nbeen a great falling off in our importation of Cuban sugar. Spain\\nreceiving little or no sugar from Cuba, necessarily her demands\\non Puerto Rico and the Philippines became greater, and hence\\nthese islands could not send us as much sugar as formerly.\\nBesides, it is not a question of the sugar we may have imported\\nfrom these islands, but rather a question of their productive ca-\\npacity. These figures clearly indicate that, the American market\\nbeing made free for these sugars, and the population shut off from\\ntheir present trade with Spain, much more sugar would come\\ninto this country from these islands than we can consume. Yet\\nit is admitted that these islands are not now, nor have they ever\\nbeen, cultivated to their full sugar capacity. Figures are not at\\nmy command showing the producing capacity in sugar and rice\\nof these islands, still sufficient data are here given to showagreater\\nproduction of sugar than we can possibly need, and the result is\\nthat large portions of these islands will be turned into rice fields,\\nand eventually the American rice producer must follow the\\nAmerican sugar producer.\\nThis must be the result of the Republican policy sought to be\\n3152", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0011.jp2"}, "12": {"fulltext": "10\\nfastened upon the American people by the pending resolution. As\\nwell take off your tariffs on these articles. They can possibly\\nserye no further useful purpose.\\nSirs, there is no more reason why Hawaii should be annexed\\nthan that the Philippines and Puerto Rico, once captured, should\\nbe held; and no more reason to hold these than to grab Cuba a\\nwar not for conquest notwithstanding. Hawaii is but the com-\\nmencement; the others will follow, and thus will the American\\nsugar and rice producers go to the wall, destroyed in the house of\\ntheir supposed friends.\\nIt is true that the same platf of in spoke of reciprocity as one of\\nits cardinal principles. It is also true that in his campaign Mr.\\nMcKinley took occasion to say in one of his addresses delivered at\\nCanton to an audience of drummers brought there to hear him\\nthat the reciprocity mentioned in the platform had especial refer-\\nence to the countries to the south of us; and to quote the sense of\\nhis remarks: The Republican party desires to shape the policy of\\nthis Government so that American flour would find a free market\\nin Havana, while the American people would enjoy the blessings\\nof cheap sugar.\\nWe from the sugar district of the United States knew that\\nsuch a policy, if pursued, would be ruinous to American sugar,\\nyet some of us felt certain that in time this policy would be\\nchanged; and, feeling so, a great many intelligent, honest, pro-\\ngressive men in my district, interested in sugar production, voted\\nfor Mr. McKinley for President. Had he or his party at that time\\ntaken the position now assumed, and advocated annexation of\\nthese islands, I venture the opinion that not 10* N per cent of the\\nvotes cast there in the last national election would have been Re-\\npublican.\\nIn place of your resolution one should be pending abrogating\\nthe existing Hawaiian treaty. It is a fraud upon the American\\nsugar producer, an imposition upon the American consumer, an\\nunjust discrimination against foreign friendly sugar nations, and\\na robbery of our National Treasury. In vain do we look for any\\nbeneficiary of this treaty, save the sugar planters on the islands\\nand the American sugar trust. It will be remembered that this\\ntreaty only exempts raw sugars. Consequently the sugar pro-\\nducer here must compete with the Hawaiian sugar producer, while\\nthe refined sugar pays duty, and the sugar trust secures the profit.\\nThe American sugar trust, the meanest, the most grasping, the\\nmost debauching and disgraceful of all the trusts, has reaped a\\nrich harvest from this treaty. It has robbed the American peo-\\nple through it. It has unjustly collected and unfairly appropri-\\nated revenues which, without the treaty, would have belonged to\\nthe Government. Without this treaty possibly it could not have\\ncleared the three hundred millions it boasts to have accumulated\\nin the last ten years upon its nominal capital of seventy-five mil-\\nlions; it perhaps could not pay two hundred thousand per year\\nto its president and its treasurer. At least those things which it\\nhas done to the injury of the American people would have been\\nless shocking without this treaty; and now you propose to per-\\npetuate all these conditions.\\nBut it is said that the sugar trust is opposed to annexation.\\nSometimes I am tempted to inquire if those who make the asser-\\ntion believe it. The truth is, under this treaty the unholy alli-\\nance of the sugar trust and the Spreckels interests have now the\\n3452", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0012.jp2"}, "13": {"fulltext": "11\\ncontrol of the sugar production on the islands. They refine the\\nwhole of it. To terminate the treaty under the twelve months\\nnotice provided for in section 5 of the treaty would ruin the fur-\\nther prospects of profits of the trust from the islands. This may\\noccur at any time. It has been attempted in Congress several\\ntimes. It should have occurred long ago.\\nHaving the control of the plantations, the trust is naturally desir-\\nous of planting its advantages on a firmer foundation. Annexation\\nwould, in honor, force this great Government to maintain its\\nsovereignty over the islands, though it bankrupt the nation, lost\\nus the best blood of the land, and wrecked the American Navy to\\ndo it. Holding the plantations in its grasp, and raw sugar raised\\non them being admitted here free, the result to the trust can not\\nbe in doubt. This Hawaiian sugar speculation would not only be\\na thing of beauty, but a joy forever to the sugar trust should\\nyour resolution become law. It will not do to argue that the\\nsugar trust is opposed to your resolution. Such argument will\\nnot deceive anyone at all familiar with the question.\\nNor will it do for honorable gentlemen to argue as your com-\\nmittee has done in its report. The bugbear that we must annex\\nHawaii because if we fail some other nation will is begging the\\nquestion entirely. It does not even rise to the dignity of an argu-\\nment. The American Government opposing, no nation will dare\\nattempt to take possession of the islands.\\nTo annex is to assume sovereignty. Sovereignty carries with it\\nresponsibility. And, in fact, one of the stock arguments of the\\nannexationists is that we should take the islands because the pres-\\nent Government can not maintain itself. Yet the Dole Govern-\\nment is essentially a white-man government. If this be true,\\nthen do these gentlemen invite us to assert control over a people\\nto assume the responsibility of a government upon the admis-\\nsion? Nay! for the very reason that the white inhabitants of the\\nislands can not maintain their superiority over its mongrel popu-\\nlation.\\nI yearn for no such responsibility. But I am not prepared to\\nadmit that the Dole Government can not maintain itself in power.\\nUnhampered by adverse legislation, such as the fourteenth\\namendment, I assert that the history of the world demonstrates\\nthat the Caucasian race, wherever it has ventured, has dominated\\nall other races. This is true of the white man everywhere and at\\nall times.\\nThe history of the reconstruction of the South bears testimony\\nto the fact that the white man will rule even though hampered by\\nenimical legislation.\\nSolongas Englandand France maintain their positions as regards\\nthe islands, so long as we stand firm to the Monroe doctrine, well\\nmay the people of the islands rest assured that no flag will wave\\nover them except their own. Well may we laugh at those who\\ntremble lest Japan or Germany or any other nation shall take pos-\\nsession of them against our wishes. And should France free her-\\nself from her agreement with England on this subject, then the\\nmore reason for a treaty with England on our part. Under those\\ncircumstances, to admit that Hawaii is in danger in her sover-\\neignty is to admit that the two great English-speaking peoples are\\nunable to maintain their own sovereignty.\\nBut what if some European or Asiatic nation does take possession\\nof them? What is the danger to us? Right off our coasts Great\\n3452", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0013.jp2"}, "14": {"fulltext": "12\\nBritian owns the Bermudas and Vancouver. All of these years\\nwe have given ourselves no great concern about this, nor did we\\nduring the war of the Revolution, nor during the war of 1812.\\nFrance owns Guadeloupe, Martinique, and St. Bartholemew, yet\\nin this moment of war we are not thrown into tremors on this\\naccount, even though France does not seem overzealous on our\\nbehalf, Jamaica belongs to England; G-ermany owns Curacao;\\nDenmark owns St. John, St. Croix, and St. Thomas, yet do we\\ncare? We have never lost sleep of nights because of these facts.\\nSpain owns the richest islands of the group to the south of us;\\nyet what good have these been to her during this war?\\nBefore formal declaration of war we had cut her off from Cuba,\\nher best island. Before a single American life had been sacrificed\\nwe held Puerto Rico in a similar condition. Even her far-off pos-\\nsessions the Philippines\u00e2\u0080\u0094 fell an easy prey to our valor and in-\\ntrepidity, and the advantage Spain once held over us there has\\nbeen and is being utilized to our advantage. So that Spain, with\\nall of her rich possessions around us, can not find a single coaling\\nstation for her fleet so as to properly prepare to give us battle.\\nOnce annexed, we can not always expect to hold Hawaii as a\\nTerritory. Territorial possession with us heretofore has only\\nbeen the probationary stage to Statehood. The time will come\\nwhen Hawaii will aspire to plant another star on our flag. Politi-\\ncal exigencies will see to it that the boon is granted. What a\\nparody on free government will her s be!\\nThe population of the islands, according to the latest estimate,\\nis as follows:\\nHawaiians (Kanakas and half-breeds) 39,504\\nJapanese 35,407\\nChinese 21,616\\nPortuguese 15,291\\nAmericans 3,080\\nBritish 2,250\\nGermans 1,432\\nWhat a magnificent free government these people would form\\nand maintain! What a rotten borough to send representatives\\nto our Congress! What votes to cast in the electoral college!\\nFrom all these things I pray God the American people may be\\nspared.\\nThe negro question has been a very serious question with the\\nSouth. It has inflicted sufferings and humiliations upon my\\npeople.\\nThe dark night of negro domination lives in the past, thank\\nGod! I want no more of it. Let us not stir up its putrid flesh nor\\nshake its decayed bones in the charnel house of oblivion.\\nLet us rather hope that some of the Southern States have solved\\nthe vexing problem, and that all the others will soon follow the\\nmagnificent example set them by South Carolina, Mississippi, and\\nLouisiana. In the name of the white men of Hawaii, let them\\ncontrol their Government without the interference of the four-\\nteenth amendment; in the name of the white men of America, let\\nus not enlarge the scope of this race question.\\nThe West suffered so long from Chinese labor that a great up-\\nrising occurred long ago among her people. The Government\\nwas appealed to, and the gates of liberty were shut to the Mon-\\ngolian.\\nLet us not add, in bulk, to the population of this great country\\nthe wretched Mongolian who now tills the sugar plantations of\\n3453", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0014.jp2"}, "15": {"fulltext": "13\\nthe islands. Let thein not come again to disturb the tranquillity\\nof our Western country. We do not want them. The American\\npeople do not care for them. They themselves are ignorant of\\nour form of government and do not wish to be of us. Those who\\ndeny this should be willing to submit tbe question to the popular\\nvote of the people of the islands, as was done with the people of\\nTexas, as was done with the people of Santo Domingo, when Presi-\\ndent Grant urged its annexation to the United States.\\nBut a greater reason than all of these conquers my judgment\\nand forces my conscience to oppose this scheme. All men may\\nnot agree with the Republican platform that it is important that\\nall sugar consumed by the American people should be produced\\non American soil; some men may be indifferent to the issue; but\\nin this all men agree who live under the American flag, that this\\nglorious Government must be perpetuated; unscathed and un-\\nscarred, it must walk through the coming centuries, accumulating\\nstrength and vigor at each step. It is accomplishing a God-\\nconceived mission on earth. It is solving the great problem of\\nfree government and human happiness. The man who would\\nchange its course by so much as a fraction of a line, would nullify\\nfor a moment the advances being made for liberty, science, and\\ncivilization, is unworthy of his country.\\nYet if we have accomplished so much it is because of the homo-\\ngeneity of our people and of the impactness of our possessions.\\nOur strength has consisted heretofore in the fact that we are es-\\nsentially a peaceful people. ISTo nation has cared to war with us\\nbecause it had nothing to gain. We have been able to follow\\nWashington s advice to keep from foreign entangling alliances\\nbecause we had no possessions foreign from our mainland to pro-\\ntect. We have kept out of foreign complications growing out of\\nEuropean and Asiatic wars because none of our possessions were\\nexposed and none could become involved. We have kept our\\nArmy on the basis of a home guard because we feared no invasion.\\nWhy change all of these advantages? Why appeal to the pas-\\nsions? Why enter the field of foreign court intrigues? Heretofore\\nwe have been able to devote our energies to the sciences and arts\\nand literature, while other nations employed much of their human\\nwealth preparing for war, offensive and defensive. We have had\\nall of our forces producing wealth, while other nations have elected\\nhalf of their forces to remain idle, compelling the other half to\\ntoil to maintain this state of idleness. Is not departure from this\\nworse than folly on our part? Nay, is it not treason itself to seek\\nto alter these glorious conditions? The truth and justness and\\nfairness of my position seem so apparent that, like the man who\\nwould prove an axiom, I find myself laboring. Did I deem it\\nnecessary to furnish authority to maintain this position, I could\\nquote from Tyler and Daniel Webster and Taylor and Blaine and\\nSherman and Bayard and others of equal prominence in the past\\npolitics of this country.\\nTo annex Hawaii will require of us the maintenance of a large\\nnavy in the Pacific Ocean; to hold Puerto Rico or any of the\\nWest Indies will require another large navy in the Gulf of Mexico\\nand the Caribbean Sea, and to hold the Philippines another navy\\nwill have to be maintained off the coast of Asia and in the Chinese\\nSea.\\nAnd why, I ask, should we squander the money to do this, when\\nfor our pains we shall only be borrowing trouble and invite war?\\n3453", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0015.jp2"}, "16": {"fulltext": "14\\nIf in the course of human events we are compelled by necessity\\nto have Hawaii, or Puerto Rico, or the Philippines, another Dewey\\nwill arise from among this great people, and the feat will soon be\\naccomplished, and glory, godlike and fair, will be our harvest.\\nWho of you doubts this?\\nThe declaration of Jefferson that we should acquire no territory\\nrequiring a navy to protect is as good policy to-day as it was when\\nhe first uttered it. It has been in keeping with this policy that\\nheretofore, with the exception of Alaska and the Aleutian Is-\\nlands, we have abstained from acquiring territory not contiguous\\nto our original thirteen colonies, though on two former occasions\\nterritory of that character was offered us as a gift. Even now,\\nafter over a quarter of a century of our possession of Alaska, the\\nmost ardent annexationist is not prepared to state that this pos-\\nsession has brought us either glory or profit, though it has been\\nthe source of complication between our Government and England;\\nwhile our possession of the Aleutian Islands has been regarded\\nso indifferently by us that we make no pretense of having a gov-\\nernment there.\\nThe day that we depart from the wise policy that I have been\\ntrying to picture disaster must overtake us. Foreign complica-\\ntions must arise; we must maintain an immense navy and stand-\\ning army; we must divert from the pursuits of peaceful occupa-\\ntion and the production of wealth a vast number of our citizens\\nand throw the burden of supporting them and the Government\\nupon the balance of the people.\\nAt the inception of our present war with Spain we were loud\\nin our declaration that humanitarian reasons alone prompted us\\nto action. The resolution declaring for armed intervention on\\nour part in the war between Spain and Cuba specifically declared\\nor strongly intimated that this war was not for conquest.\\nYet this Administration seems now entirely devoted to the con-\\nquest and acquisition of territory. The people of Cuba must be\\nrelieved, we said. Yet not a blow has so far been struck to re-\\nlieve the reconcentrados, while 9,000 miles from these suffering\\npeople our fleet has found its way and territory is in the course\\nof changing hands. During this time a peaceful blockade of Cuba\\nis berng~maintained. To all intents and purposes we are giving\\nassistance to the Spaniard in his policy to starve out his Cuban\\nsubjects. Alas, poor humanity; another great crime is being\\ncommitted in thy name!\\nListen! Colonial territory! Imperial policy! What en-\\nticing phrases! How dazzling to the eye! How euphonious to\\nthe ear!\\nBut, my countrymen, do not forget that these never come un-\\nattended. They have never become a people s possession that\\ntranquillity and peace and harmony and happiness have not de-\\nparted. History does not record the people whose highest aspira-\\ntion this was that it did not encompass their destruction.\\nThis issue was never presented to the American people. Let\\nnot gentlemen here listen to the croaking of partisan newspapers\\nand accept it as the voice of the people. It is not the people s\\nvoice you hear; it is the voice of the interested party, who arro-\\ngates to himself the voice of the nation. They are but visions\\nand dreams of imperial grandeur, that are being conjured up by\\nthese special advocates.\\nThe American people are too sensible, too full of common sense,\\n3452", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0016.jp2"}, "17": {"fulltext": "15\\nto be lured from their peaceful avocations, to seek to embark in\\na field of conquest and strife and intrigue and war. You who\\ndoubt this dare not consult them.\\nThese are evils that I fear. They will undermine the Republic.\\nI can not free my mind from these conclusions. They force them-\\nselves upon me. I am unwilling to attempt the experiment.\\nContinuing the wise policy that to this hour we have pursued,\\nI see everything ahead bright and glorious, and can predict of\\nthis Republic what Lord Macaulay said of the Catholic Church:\\nShe may still exist in undiminished vigor when some traveler from New-\\nZealand shall, in the midst of avast solitude, take his stand on a broken arch\\nof London Bridge to sketch the ruins of St. Paul s.\\n[Applause.]\\n3153\\nO", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0017.jp2"}, "18": {"fulltext": "LIBRARY OF CONGRESS\\n019 944 324", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0018.jp2"}, "19": {"fulltext": "", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0019.jp2"}, "20": {"fulltext": "LIBRARY OF CONGRESS\\n019 944 324\\nHollinger Corp.\\nP H8.5", "height": "4512", "width": "2616", "jp2-path": "hawaiispeechofho00brou_0020.jp2"}}