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 ]

That after the overthrow of the monarchy a property qualification 
was imposed upon electors for senators. That this created a distinct 
class of conservative men who held in check the lower house and 
gave representation to those who by their thrift and energy and 
capital and intelligence have built up the country. That the natives can 
cast 4 votes to the Anglo-Saxons' 1. That the native has not acquired 
the habit of self-government, and that to suppose he has would be to 
suppose the most remarkable example in history of the rapid rise of a 
people from barbarism to advanced civilization. That the natives have 
few wants, which are supplied by little labor; that they are naturally 
shiftless, improvident, and unacquisitive.    That in 1840 every native 
was given a homestead in fee simple, but that the majority of the 
natives have since parted with their homesteads and have spent the 
proceeds. That a few retain their homesteads, but rent them out to 
Chinese and other tenants. That they are herdsmen, excellent sailors, 
and drivers of horses in cities and on plantations, but that very few 
take to merchandise, and those who do take to a primitive kind of 
merchandising, involving no capital, such as small retail fruit and fish 
stores. That, being by the very necessity of the case "hewers of wood 
and drawers of water," without hereditary or acquired commercial 
tendencies, they entertain more or less political jealousy toward the 
more prosperous white man, although personally and privately 
friendly and dependent upon him, and that this jealousy is stimulated 
by irresponsible white "beach comers" for purposes of their own. That 
under mere manhood suffrage, with educational qualification 
superadded, the native population might exclude white rep-
resentatives from the legislature or return white demagogues. That the 
native is kind, affectionate, generous, well-meaning, quick to learn, 
and personally loyal, but is a child of the Tropics, and believes the 
last story he hears. That he has not yet learned to regard the ballot as a 
moral force, and that, being irresponsible financially, his domination of 
the legislature would probably lead to a period of political corruption 
in which the thrifty, educated, and progressive classes would be 
obliged to purchase immunity from legislative oppression, and leg-
islation would by reason thereof become a matter of bargain and sale. 
That the "republic" and the proposed Territorial government have 
been evolved out of a condition which was indeed supported by the 
native vote, but was abolished because the native race had proved 
itself incapable of self-government according to the Anglo-Saxon 
standard. I have endeavored to present that argument just as strongly 
as it has ever been presented to the committee or could have been 
presented to the commissioners, who are honorable, conscientious 
men, and who visited the island. Now, two points must be taken into 
consideration in dealing with this question: First, the senate is composed 
of 15 members, elected from four districts, spread all over the 
islands, and the house is composed of 30 members, elected from six 
districts.   It will be observed that the natives have abandoned their 
homesteads and have assembled in cities, and principally in Honolulu. 
This being true, it seems to me, that it would be difficult for the natives 
so to spread themselves evenly over the districts as to be able to control 
the legislature in that way.   That is one safeguard which presents itself 
to my mind.   The next is this: It is conceded that the natives are many of 
them intelligent people, who are able to comprehend and appreciate the 
meaning of the electoral privilege and are capable of legislation. Now, 
gentlemen - and I put this to my friend from Connecticut - this 
problem spreads itself beyond these islands and reaches a great, 
fundamental, underlying principle of our nationality. Mr. HILL.   
Did not the bill which the committee reported last year include a 
property qualification? Mr. HAMILTON.   I was not on that committee 
-- Mr. HILL.   Did not the commissioners who went to Hawaii 
report when they came back in favor of a property qualification? Mr. 
HAMILTON.   I have so stated. Mr. HILL.   Now, let me ask one 
more question.   But for the acquisition of Puerto Rico, Cuba, and the 
Philippines, would any change have been made in this matter of 
self-government for Hawaii? Mr. HAMILTON.   Oh, I do not think 
that had anything to do with it.   I should like very much, if I had 
the time, to discuss the subject of Cuba and Puerto Rico and the 
Philippines, though those subjects have been pretty well discussed.   
I want to say to the gentleman from Connecticut that the 
Committee on Territories have reported this bill unanimously, both 
Republicans and Democrats supporting it.   They have tried to consider 
these questions with absolute fairness.   The question of Puerto Rico 
and the

Philippines has not entered into the consideration of this bill at all. 
It has been our theory - and I think I voice the sentiments of the 
members of that committee - that each territory should come into 
the fraternity of this Union under our governmental control - 
under our Congressional control, if you please - on its own basis, 
and that the Government of the United Slates will be able to take 
care of each territory as it presents itself. Now, I say that that 
problem spreads beyond these islands and reaches the underlying 
and fundamental principle of our nationality.   All that the advocates 
for a property qualification have said in behalf of such a provision 
in Hawaii - all that my friend from Connecticut could probably say  
-- Mr. HILL.   The gentleman must not make any mistake.   I am 
not in favor of a property qualification - not at all - not under any 
circumstances anywhere.   But I am opposed to starting a Territorial 
government in Hawaii with four Kanaka votes to every single vote 
of an intelligent white man. Mr. HAMILTON.   Does not the 
gentleman want to establish a government there?                                             
Mr. HILL.   I do, but not the kind of a government that this 
committee recommends. Mr. HAMILTON.   My time is too limited, 
and I presume the gentleman would not have an opportunity to 
present his views fully on this subject, or I should be interested in 
knowing what his scheme of government for that Territory might 
be.   He is a very able man who is able to present, full fledged, a 
scheme of government offhand. Mr. HILL.   There is no hurry about 
it anyway. Mr. HAMILTON.   There is a good deal of hurry.   Time 
enough has elapsed.   They are afflicted with the bubonic plague, they 
are in suspense, and there should be some sort of government there. 
Mr. HILL.   Do yon propose to annex that? Mr. HAMILTON.   We 
propose to annex Hawaii, certainly, and we propose to give those 
people some method of managing the conditions which exist there. 
Now, let me proceed.   I said that all that had been said here in favor 
of a property qualification for Hawaii has been said in favor of a 
property qualification generally.   For instance, Mr. Paley, in 
speaking of the English constitution of the eighteenth century, in 
his work on Moral Philosophy, says:
Before we ask to obtain anything more, consider duly what we have.   We have a 
House of Commons, composed of 548 members, In which number are the most 
considerable landholders and merchants in the Kingdom; the heads of the army, 
the navy, and the law; the occupiers of great offices in the State, together with 
many private individuals, eminent by their knowledge, eloquence, and activity.   
If the country be not safe in such hands, in whom may it confide its interests?   If 
such a number of such men be liable to the Influence of corrupt motives, what 
assembly of men will be secure from the same danger?   Does any scheme of 
representation promise to collect together more wisdom or to produce firmer 
And yet what political party nowadays would dare to advocate a 
form of government as best because composed exclusively of rich 
men, officeholders, landholders, bondholders, railroad magnates, 
shipowners, trust promoters, and Army and Navy officers? Our form 
of government gives representation to all classes and professions, 
from the frontier homestead to the brownstone front, from the 
merchant prince to the laborer in the ditch, and between the two great 
extremes of abject poverty and superfluous wealth is the great body of 
the plain people, in whose hands our nationality is still safe, thank 
God.    [Applause on the Republican side.] People, with a few more 
furbelows, perhaps, than in Lincoln's day.   We have passed from 
the era of jeans to creased trousers, and the style of parting the hair 
differs according to age and the amount of hair; but we are still 
plain people.   And, gentlemen, when the plain people of this great 
Government can not be trusted, then indeed our country is in danger. 
Commenting upon the English reform bills of 1833 and 1837, and the 
exercise of the franchise generally, in advocating its limitation to 
those having educational and property qualifications, Mr. Lecky, in 
his work on Democracy and Liberty, says:
Different methods will be employed.   Sometimes the voter will be directly bribed 
or directly intimidated.   He will vote for money or for drink, or in order to 
win the favor or avert the displeasure of some one who is more powerful than 
himself.   The tenant will think of his landlord, the debtor of his creditor, the 
shopkeeper of his customer. A poor, struggling man called on to vote upon a 
question about which he cares nothing and knows nothing is surely not to be 
greatly blamed if he is governed by such considerations. A still larger number of 
votes will be won by persistent appeals to class cupidities. The demagogue will 
try to persuade the voter that by following a certain line of policy every member 
of society will obtain some advantage. He will encourage all their Utopias.   He 
will hold oat hopes that by break-big contracts or shifting taxation and the 
power of taxing or enlarging the paternal functions of government something of 
the property of one cuss may be transferred to another. He will also appeal 
persistently, and often successfully, to class jealousies and antipathies.   All the 
divisions which naturally grow out of class lines and the relations between 
employer and employed will be studiously inflamed. Envy, covetousness, 
prejudice, will become great forces in political propagandism.   Every real 
grievance will be aggravated.   Every redressed grievance will be revived.  Every 
imaginary grievance will be encouraged.

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)  |