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

2443
Mr. CLARK of Wyoming.   There is no question on earth about it; 
that is, under the monarchy. Mr. BATE.   Then the recent 
government seized those lands? Mr. CLARK of Wyoming.   They 
took them all. Mr. BATE.   They have also taken the rentals annually 
of those lands and appropriated them to themselves? I    Mr. CLARK 
of Wyoming.   Yes, sir. Mr. BATE.   And this woman has got none 
of the rentals and none of the lands? Mr. CLARK of Wyoming.   
She has none of the lands and none of the rentals. Mr. BATE.   The 
United States Government proposes to take all those lands into its 
own possession and keep them as property belonging to the United 
States? Mr. CLARK of Wyoming.   Yes; that is the proposition 
exactly. Mr. BATE.   And offers to her $230,000 for them as a 
bonus. I suppose. Mr. CLARK of Wyoming.   Well -- Mr. BATE.   
As compensation, then.   But she has not been consulted about 
that matter. Mr. CLARK of Wyoming.   Not that I know of, by the 
Government.   If she is willing to take it, as the amendment proposes, 
that ends all claims she has upon the Government of the United 
States or upon the Territory of Hawaii in regard to this matter. Mr. 
BATE.   It seems to me, upon that kind of a showing, it is not very 
creditable to this Government that it should be done. Mr. CLARK 
of Wyoming.   It is not creditable to the Government the way it is 
now. Mr. KYLE.   Will the Senator from Wyoming allow me?   Were 
these lands the personal property of the Queen? Mr. CLARK of 
Wyoming.   They were not the personal property of the Queen in the 
sense that she could alienate them.   They were the personal property 
of the Queen or the reigning sovereign in the sense that the revenues 
of these lands went to the reigning sovereign. Mr. KYLE.   The 
annual income from these lands was set aside by the monarchy for 
the support of the Queen.   Was not that all? Mr. CLARK of 
Wyoming.   Yes. Mr. KYLE.   The same as it is in Great Britain? 
Mr. CLARK of Wyoming.   Yes, sir; that is right. Mr. KYLE.   But 
they were not her personal property at all? Mr. CLARK of 
Wyoming.   Not in the sense that she could give any deed in fee 
simple. Mr. KYLE.   She had no other right to them than any 
other woman who might have been upon the throne as queen. Mr. 
CLARK of Wyoming.   The Senator is right. Mr. KYLE.   It was 
not her property at all, as I understand. Mr. PETTIGREW.   What 
is the income derived from these lands? Mr. CLARK of Wyoming.   
I can not give the exact figures, but the income at present is 
between one hundred and one hundred and fifty thousand dollars 
per annum. Mr. PETTIGREW.   What was it at the time the 
Queen was deposed? Mr. CLARK of Wyoming.   Fifty thousand 
dollars. Mr. PETTIGREW.   She was deposed in 1893? Mr. CLARK 
of Wyoming.   Yes, sir. Mr. PETTIGREW.   She is still living? Mr. 
CLARK of Wyoming.   Yes, sir. Mr. PETTIGREW.   It seems to 
me we can not afford to pass this bill without providing for the 
Queen, inasmuch as we dethroned the Queen.   Nobody else did 
it.   The United States did it.   We landed our troops there. Mr. 
CLARK of Wyoming.   The Senator is perfectly right. Mr. 
PETTIGREW.   We took her government away.   No other forces 
did it than the forces of the United States.   Then we made a treaty 
with the puppets we set up for title to that country. Therefore, it 
seems to me, it would be shameful to pass this bill without making 
some such provision. Mr. JONES of Arkansas.   Mr. President -- 
The PRESIDENT pro tempore.   Does the Senator from Wyoming 
yield to the Senator from Arkansas? Mr. CLARK of Wyoming.   If I 
have the floor. The PRESIDENT pro tempore.   The Senator from 
Wyoming has the floor. Mr. CLARK of Wyoming.    I yield to the 
Senator from Arkansas. Mr. JONES of Arkansas.   One difficulty 
about this, it occurs to me, is that this provision in the bill seems 
to be a recognition In the Queen of the ownership of these lands.   It 
is on that ground that we propose to make a one-sided trade, 
without her consent, and to give her $250,000.   So if she does not 
take it, she can come back and say that we having recognized that she 
owns these lands, she is entitled to the million and a half or two 
millions and a half that they are worth.   Now, if these lands 
belonged to the Queen, that is one thing.   If they belonged to the 
crown, it is another thing. Mr. CLARK of Wyoming.   I should 
like to ask the Senator to

state the difference, as he understands it, between belonging to the 
Queen and belonging to the crown. Mr. KYLE.   There is a great 
difference. Mr. CLARK of Wyoming.   There is no difference. Mr. 
JONES of Arkansas.   One belongs to the office: the other belongs 
to the person.   The office was organized by the government that 
existed there, and this was the means of supporting the office which 
those people had organized and continued until they chose to 
abolish it, and the property which they had sot apart to maintain 
that office was not needed to maintain an office that did not exist. 
Mr. CLARK of Wyoming.   May I ask the Senator a question? Is he 
aware of the fact that the reigning sovereign of the country by the 
law of the land was entitled to name his or her successor? Mr. 
JONES of Arkansas.   That made no difference.   It did not give the 
person the ownership of property which belonged to the office.   
That cuts no figure whatever in it.   The Queen of the Sandwich 
Islands is no more the owner of the Crown lands than the President 
of the United States is the owner of the Executive Mansion during 
his term. Mr. MORGAN.   Or of the public lands. Mr. JONES of 
Arkansas.   Or of the public lands of the United States.   The public 
lands of the United States belong to the people, the body of the 
people, the whole people.   Whatever they may be set aside for, 
they belong to the body of the people, the whole people.   The 
sovereign of the United States would not be the owner if we had a 
sovereign.   The President is not the owner when wo have a 
President. It seems to mo the Senate ought to be cautious about 
taking a step of this kind.   While I am opposed generally to the 
whole of this legislation, and believe it is a mistake from the 
beginning, and agree fully with the Senator from South Dakota [Mr. 
PETTIGREW] about the action of our Government in overthrowing 
that government, still I think we had better look a little carefully 
before we put our foot down in a case of this kind. Mr. CLARK of 
Wyoming.   Mr. President, I do not care at this late hour to take any 
time on this question; but I believe that a great wrong has been 
done. Mr. JONES of Arkansas.   I believe that. Mr. CLARK of 
Wyoming.   We all know that revolutions, if successful, are just; 
they are legal; and the successful power has the right to do what it 
pleases.   It is not often that I agree with the Senator from South 
Dakota on political questions, but there is no man in this 
Chamber, if you get him out in a corner of the cloakroom, who 
will not acknowledge that the revolution in Hawaii was made 
possible only by the arms of the United States of America.   Now, 
can we not afford to be at least equitable and just and honest in this 
matter?   We took those islands?   They had to go somewhere.   I do 
not regret that we took them.   I am very glad of it, because I think 
that of all the domain over which the American flag flies to-day the 
Sandwich Islands are the fairest and give promise of the most in the 
future. But, Mr. President, there was a great wrong perpetrated.   It 
may not be news to any Senators, but at the time of the revolution 
which displaced the monarchy and displaced the Queen there was 
not a thing that was not sequestered and confiscated - not only the 
Crown lands, to the revenue of which she was entitled, but 
everything in her household from the blue china on the sideboard to 
the tin dipper in the kitchen. Mr. KYLE.   I have no objection to 
setting apart something for the Queen.   That is not my objection at 
all, but I take exactly the position occupied by the Senator from 
Arkansas [Mr. JONES] , that she has no right whatever to the Crown 
lands. Mr. CLARK of Wyoming.   She has no right? Mr. KYLE.   
No.   I put it upon a different ground. Mr. CLARK of Wyoming.   
I put it upon the ground of equity and good conscience, that a 
great Government like this taking possession of those islands can 
afford to be generous and just and equitable.   I do not go into the 
law side of the court to urge this claim.   I come into the equity 
side of the court.   We took all these lands, and the minute this bill 
passes we get a hundred or a hundred and fifty thousand per 
annum from them. Mr. PLATT of Connecticut.   For the benefit of 
the people of the Hawaiian Islands, however. Mr. CLARK of 
Wyoming.   That is all right.   It may be for the benefit of the 
people, but can the Senator from Connecticut say that in equity and 
good conscience something ought not to be done for the government 
that has been revolutionized? Mr. PLATT of Connecticut.   If the 
Senator wishes a reply, I will say that I think whether we shall 
donate something to the Queen is one question.  The question 
whether we should recognize her title to the lands and admit that 
we have been to blame about that revolution is an entirely 
different thing.   I am not disposed to do that. Mr. CLARK of 
Wyoming.   My amendment does not meet the remarks of the 
Senator from Connecticut.   It simply provides that we shall pay her 
$250,000 upon her relinquishment of all claims that she may have or 
claim to have upon those lands.   That is all.   

Return to Top