University of Hawaii at Manoa Library

Home: The Annexation Of Hawaii: A Collection Of Document

Hawaii Organic Act: Congressional debates on Hawaii Organic Act

[ Previous Page ] -- [ View PDF ] -- [ View in MS Word ] -- [ Next Page ]

familiarize themselves almost perfectly with the Hawaiian tongue, they have to 
listen to the trials where the Hawaiians themselves are witnesses, the men and 
the women who do not speak the language and are too old to be educated in it. 
They must have a very extensive acquaintance with the customs of the country, 
with the origin and source of the law in that country, a great deal of which is 
customary law, traditional law, not based upon printed or written statutes at all. 
I do not know any country in the world where a judge, to be competent to 
discharge all of the duties of his office, is required to know more than a judge in 
The judges in Hawaii also have had the administration of all questions of 
maritime and international law in which that republic is concerned. They have 
had very extensive training in that regard, and very important training. Now, 
perhaps, there is not a place in the United States where a learned admiralty 
judge is so conspicuously required as in the Hawaiian Islands, nor is there any 
place in this Union where a court of competent jurisdiction to be administered 
by such a judge can be established with greater profit and benefit to the country 
itself and to the General Government of the United States than in Hawaii.
I refer to these matters as I pass along merely for the purpose of showing the 
importance that we attributed to our action in dealing with those courts. The plan 
of the committee was corresponding with that of the republic there, its 
constitution, to retain the judges in office according to the tenure of office fixed in 
the constitution of Hawaii. But we saw that that had to give way; and the 
Committee on Foreign Relations, in reporting the bill that is now before the 
Senate, instead of having a life tenure for the judges of the supreme court, 
provided a tenure of nine years for those judges. The statutes of Hawaii had 
provided a tenure of six years, I believe it was, for the circuit judges before that 
time, and that still remains.
We thought, Mr. President, that it was just to that bench and just to those 
people that the supreme court judges, who were in there for life, should not 
be disturbed. We did not understand that we were sent out there for the 
purpose of butchering the republic, eviscerating it, and taking from it those 
qualities and powers and properties which the people there so cheerfully have 
vested in that court or in the judges and have profited so greatly by both in the 
matter of keeping the peace and in the preservation of all their rights, for the 
court is a very enlightened one. We did not think so, and we made a report in 
which these judges were retained in office until their successors were qualified. 
But that will now pass out of this bill by amendment. This bill, when it passes, 
will legislate those judges out of office, and the offices will be vacant until their 
places are supplied by a new source of appointing power. There will be a hiatus 
there necessarily.
Mr. TELLER. Will the Senator from Alabama allow me to ask him a question?
Mr. MORGAN.   Certainly.
Mr. TELLER. Do I understand that the bill as reported by the committee 
legislates those judges out of office?
Mr. MORGAN. Necessarily so, when, on page 37, lines 13, 14, and 15 are 
stricken out, as I understand they are to be.
Mr. TJLLMAN. That is the amendment of the Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. MORGAN. No. When we reported the bill I think the Committee on 
Foreign Relations inadvertently left in those provisions there, because it is 
inconsistent with the nine years' tenure. The object of the commission was to 
leave those judges in office with their life tenure; but when the bill was 
reported back from the Committee on Foreign Relations the life tenure was re-
duced to nine years, and the committee omitted to strike out lines 13, 14, and 
15. on page 37, which would retain them until their successors were qualified. 
That is stricken out. I speak of the situation of this bill as I am discussing it now.
Mr. President, you now have the reasons which influenced the commission in 
presenting the supreme court with this life tenure of office; but we did not 
continue that as an organic part of the law of the Territory. We provided that 
after the terms of the present incumbents expired, their successors, when 
qualified, should take a limited term of office. So the new judges coming in to 
take the place of these-for instance, to take the place of Chief Justice Judd, 
who has resigned since annexation took place-would have to take a shorter term, 
a fixed term, not a life tenure. We abolished the life tenure, except as to those 
judges who al-ready held their positions; but the Senate has stricken out all life 
tenure and has made the positions now dependent upon the pro-visions of the 
bill as amended, which limit the term to nine years, and which, when enacted, if it 
shall be enacted in its present form, will simply vacate the offices-necessarily 
vacate them-because it refers the appointing power to the President of the 
United States instead of the governor of the Territory.
Was it wrong, was it unjust, was it anti-republican, was it anti-American, 
was it against the spirit of the American people, when we were dealing with 
this grand republic, that we should permit its supreme court to remain there to 
discharge its functions? Is there any violence done to anybody's principles, 

some demagogue, who wants to appeal to the people against the life tenure? 
But that provision is out, and there is no use of die-cussing it any longer.
The only question now is between a nine years' term and a four years' term. I 
think that I can undertake to say, from my experience and observation as a 
lawyer, that there is not a man outside of Hawaii, to say the least of it, who 
can qualify himself in four years to be a judge of the supreme court in those 
islands; ho can not understand their laws, their institutions, their customs, their 
language, their people; he would be a foreigner presiding upon that bench, and 
that is the kind of man you propose to crowd in there, I suppose from the State 
of Connecticut, or somewhere else, whom the politicians can pick out and send 
down there, and put the harness of judicial office upon him.
There are two systems, and the principles which underlie them are so utterly 
repugnant to each other that they can not stand together; and in all public 
morality and political economy the credit of the system is on the Hawaiian side 
and not on our side, as proposed by this amendment.
Mr. TELLER. I want to ask the Senator a question, if he will allow me.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. KEAN in the chair). Does the Senator from 
Alabama yield to the Senator from Colorado?
Mr. MORGAN.   I do.
Mr. TELLER. I did not understand from reading this bill that we were 
leaving those judges in office.
Mr. MORGAN. As amended, I will say. if the Senator will allow me, by 
striking out lines 13, 14. and 15, on page 37.
Mr. TELLER. 1 want to call the attention of the Senator to page 35, at the 
beginning of section 81, which reads:
That the governor shall nominate and, by and with the advice and con-sent 
of the senate of the Territory of Hawaii, appoint the chief justice and justices 
of the supreme court, the judges of the circuit courts -
It seemed to me that that language meant that the governor should appoint, 
and of course he could appoint others than the present judges. I agree with the 
Senator, if I may be allowed to say a word further, that those men ought not to 
be disturbed in their office. It is possible that we might limit the office to a 
tenure somewhat less than a life tenure, although it would not, scare me if the 
judges had a life tenure; but it did not seem to mo that this bill contemplated 
that. I confess I do not know very much about it, though I have tried to study it, 
but it seems to me to contain some contradictions.
Mr. MORGAN. I am arguing the proposed amendment submitted by the 
Senator from Connecticut [Mr. PLATT] .
Mr. TELLER. I want to say to the Senator that I am not going to vote for 
that amendment. I want to know what the bill means of itself. I want to know 
whether, if I vote against the amendment of the Senator from Connecticut, I 
shall be voting for the provision that the governor shall nominate, or whether I 
am voting that he may do what the President himself may do, disturb those 
people in their offices.
Mr. MORGAN. I will explain so that the Senator from Colorado, 1 think, can 
not be misled about it.
The bill as reported from the committee containing the amendments in italics 
provided for the appointment of the supreme court judges by the governor and 
limited the term of office after the present incumbents should go out; but in 
lines 13, 14, and 15, on page 37. it was provided that the present incumbents 
should continue in office. That was the bill as reported. It has been amended; it 
is proposed to be amended again; and now I am speaking to the proposed 
amendment. That amendment takes the appointing power away from the 
governor of the Territory and gives it to the President of the United States.
Mr. WOLC OTT.   May I ask the Senator a question?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Alabama, yield?
Mr. MORGAN.   I do.
Mr. WOLCOTT. I ask if the amendment of the Senator from Connecticut 
should be carried, would the existing judges serve out their terms?
Mr. MORGAN.   No; they would not.
Mr. WOLCOTT. If I may ask the Senator a further question, Would they 
serve out their term under the nine years' provision, as it is at present in the bill?
Mr. MORGAN. They would by keeping in the bill the language contained in 
lines 13, 14, and 15, on page 37.
Mr. WOLCOTT. Does the amendment of the Senator from Connecticut 
strike out those lines?
Mr. MORGAN.    Yes; that amendment strikes out those lines.
Mr. TELLER. I want to call the attention of the Senator to page 37, section 
81, commencing with line 8, which reads:
All persons holding office in the Hawaiian Islands at the time this act takes 
effect shall, except as herein otherwise provided, continue to hold their re 
spective offices until such offices become vacant -
If it stopped there, I should have no trouble, but the provision continues-
but not beyond the end of the first session of the Senate, unless reappointed as 
herein provided.

Return to Top

Terms of Use  |  UH Mānoa  |  UH System  |  Ask Us
University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa Library  |  2550 McCarthy Mall  |  Honolulu, Hawaii 96822 USA
808-956-7214 (Reference)  |  808-956-7203 (Circulation)  |  808-956-7205 (Administration)
808-956-5968 (fax)  |