Newspaper Page Text
PACIFIC COMMERCIAL ADVERTISER SUPPLEMENT AUG. 3, 1878.
REPORT OF SPECIAL C03I3IITTE E
HON. GODFREY RHODES,
President of the Legislative Assembly,
Mr. President : The undersigned .Special Committee, to
whom were referred a majoritj and a minority report of the
Committee on Foreign Relations, also a report of Hon. II.
A. 1 Carter, with two resolutions of Hon. Messrs. Rhodes
and Gibson, beg to lay before the Assembly their views and
conclusions on the questions involved.
The reports relate to two subjects : our treaty relations
with Great Britain and a scheme of East India immigration.
In respect to the former, we are chiefly at issue with the
uoverumeut of Her JJntannic Majesty in regard to the inter
pretation of the fourth Article of the Anglo-Hawaiian Treaty of
1851, ami have to consider a question of claims growing out
of an alleged infringement of the requirements of this Arti
cle whilst in force.
The views taken ou this subject by British and Hawaiian
officials engaged in the discussion are so decidedly in opposi
tion the one to the oilier that your Committee have anxiously
sought for some solution or explanation of this wide diver
gence of opinion and interpretation. The Article in question
is the unconditional most favored nation stipulation of the
Treaty, and insists that the commercial intercourse of the
two contracting parties shall be such that whatever advantage
is conceded by the one to a third party shall be enjoyed by
the other, without reference to any compensation therefor.
But thi3 stipulation is preceded by one that is conditional,
the third Article, which provides that when a concession is
made by any party to a Treaty for an equivalent, that a
bimilar concession can only be claimed by the other party in
return , for a corresponding value. And there is apparent
conflict between these two Articles the one conditional, and
the other unconditional.
Now, from the Hawaiian standpoint in this discussion,
which has the third Article mainly in view, it has been con
tended that this Government infringed no Treaty obligations
with Great Britain by conceding to the United States in a
Treaty of Reciprocity a free entry of certain goods into
Hawaii, in return for a free entry into America of Hawaiian
produce; and that Great Britain could not insist upon the en
joyment of a concession for which she could not offer any
adequate compensation. And this view of our Government
is sustained by a British interpretation of the above-mentioned
conditional stipulation of the Anglo-Hawaiian Treaty, as is
fully and clearly expressed in the Clarendon instructions of
185G. (See Appendix, Exhibit A.) No opinion or inter
pretation to the contrary of this view of the case has been re
ceived by this Government from the British Government
until the Derby instructions of 1877. (Sec Appendix, Ex
Hence it has been maintained by our Government that not
only was there no infringement of our Treaty obligations with
Great Britain growing out of a Convention of Reciprocity with
America, but furthermore, there was no occasion for the de- ,
nunciation of the fourth or unconditional Article of the
British Treaty in consequence of the operation of the Amer-
On the other hand, the representatives of Her Britannic
Majesty have claimed a consideration of the spirit as well as
the letter of the Anglo-Hawaiian Treaty of 1851, and have
tainted to the seventeenth Article as a general stipulation of
comity, engaging cacli contracting party not to seek any
modification of their compact except with a view to v" the
improvement of their mutual intercourse and to the interest
of their respective subjects," and not to be brought about in
consequence of either party making some "special tariff bar
gain", with another country. . ' ' - .
At this point, your Committee beg to glance in review at
some particulars in the history of our Treaty relations, and at
our traditional policy as inculcated by the carry organizers of
our Government, ,and by the representatives of friendly
Hawaii has had a remarkable and instructive Treaty his
tory. First, in her unrecognized state, he was subject to
the arbitrary sponsio, dictated by a naval commander, at the
cannon's mouth. Afterwards, through earnest and faithful
diplomacy, recognition is secured, and certain treaty relations
are conceded, still with onerous restrictions, as though recog
nition wa3 only partially granted to a nation in a state of
pupilage, inasmuch as foreign representatives were allowed
to exercise judicial authority on our soil, and to dictate to our
Government interferences in respect to legislative ami minis
terial action. ,
But Hawaii was guided by men who labored patiently
under various difficulties to secure for her the untrammelled'
condition of a fully-recognised enlightened State. The able,
faithful, far-seeing "Wyllie felt deeply the treaty restrictions
which affected the honor of his Sovereign and impaired l.tha -independence
of his adopted State. By a course of negotia
tion which must entitle him to rank high as a statesman, he
induced great Powers to grant treaties to this young State,
which recognised her perfect sovereignty and entire indepen
dence ; and among tne most important of these was the
Anglo-Hawaiian Treaty of 1851. This was a boon from Great
Britain to Little Hawaii. We are assured that this Treaty
was framed in the Foreign Office at London, and sent for our
Government's acceptance, as a voluntary offering of goodwill
from England. (See Appendix, Exhibit C.) Therefore
there arc abundant grounds for Hawaii to entertain a high
traditional regard for this Treaty. Yet it was not, and should
not be our policy to entertain any partialities in treaties with
great Powers. It especially behooves so weak a State as
jCawaii to aim at uniformity and identity in the character of
beiT international relations. She could not concede an especial
favo.T" to any one of several guaranteeing Powers without
affecting, the independence of her situation. Therefore all
the eai'Jy friends of Hawaii strongly recommended , her to
never rant any especial commercial favor to any nation.
This was the instruction of King Leopold of Belgium, and the
very especial injunction of the great statesman of America,
Daniel We bsfer, who said to Hawaiian Commissioners that
no Power in negotiation with this Kingdom " ought to seek .
for any exclusive privileges or preferences in matters of com
merce." (See Appendix, Exhibit D.)
Now the American Treaty of Reciprocity may be regarded
a3 a departure ,from; this policy ; rin its negotiation the
spirit of the Anglo-Hawaiian Treaty of 1851 was overlooked,
and its operation has led to the question at issue, as stated
above: between the British and Hawaiian Governments.
It may be very properly urged that the spirit of the
Anglo-Hawaiian Treaty of 1851, in its 17th Article, required
that some preliminary proposition and mutual understanding
between the two contracting parties should precede any sti
pulations "with a third party, calculated to disturb in any way
the perfect harmony of their mutual intercourse, and that the
unconditional obligations of the Treaty should be observed.
On the other-' liand, the conditional' stipulation can be
pointed at, aud very decided grounds taken, that the 3d
Article of the Anglo-Hawaiian Treaty especially recognizes
the principle of reciprocity and of granting especial favors for
valuable equivalents, which favors, of course, are to be con
ceded to all other treaty parties who can offer a like consider
ationthe objection to this being that any one of two treaty
parties should not negotiate with a third party a concession
which it is known that its co-contraetant is not in a condition
to accept. . - - . ;
Hence your Committee must recognize that the negotiation
of the American Reciprocity Treaty by our Government
afforded some grounds for exceptions to be taken by treaty
powers claiming the most favored nation privileges ; and
guch exceptions were strongly taken by even legal minds in
America. . (See Appendix, Exhibit E.) And farthermore,
an increase of the duty on imports in 187G, not called for by
any deficiency of revenue, was an additional cause of irrita
tion. But this treaty is not, after all, a ground of objections
on the part of the British Government. We have assurances
from the British Foreign Secretary, Lord Derby, in his in
structions to the British Commissioner in Hawaii (see Appen
dix, Exhibit B), that the British Government accepted fully
the explanations of our Envoy, Mr. Carter, in respect to the
Reciprocity Treaty. Yet there is a reclamation on account
of its operation or rather, claims of importers of British
merchandise are pointed out, who paid, as alleged, an excess
of duty during the operation of the unconditional 4th Article,
now withdrawn. At this point, jour Committee venture to
remark that Groat Britain, owing to the difference between
her Imperial and Colonial turitls, was not herself in a condi
tion to fulfil the treaty obligations stipulated for in the 4th
Article of Anglo-Hawaiian Treaty of 1851. (See Appendix,
Exhibit F). However, here is a case for the consideration
of our Courts of Law, and for which the Constitution of thi3
Government provides. And it is the opinion of your Com
mittee that any stranger residing here under the protection
of our laws, who feels aggrieved, should seek the remedies
which these laws provide", and would only in case of denial of
justice be warranted in maldng anv appeal to another Power.
Such a course of procedure would be in accordance with the
spirit of an enlightened nation like Great Britain. We have
a precedent in the treatment of a certain reclamation for ex-i-ess
of duties in the case of the "Asa Thor," under our
treaty with Denmark. This was a question of claim growing
out of treaty interpretation, which was adjudicated in our
Courts, and our action was accepted by the Government of
Denmark. (See Appendix, Exhibit G).
The amount of claims on account of excess of duty paid
over ten per cent, are so small only $1,177 14 (see Ap
pendix, Exhibit If) that it is evident to your ' Committee
that the whole question is mainly one of principle. Of course,
the smalluess of the amount claimed will not tend to dimin
ish the importance of the principle involved in the estimation
of a Treaty-observing nation like Great Britain. And when
such a Power expects a like exactitude of observance from
Hawaii, it is in the highest sense a recognition of our perfect
A Kingdom like Hawaii, whose only strength as a State is
her weakness, should be especially scrupulous in respect to
the exact observance of her Treaties with great Powers. She
should be prompt to respond to any question of reclamation,
and by her intelligence, open and impartial dealing, command
a recognition of her moral worth that would raise her in the
rank of nations far beyond the extent of her material re
sources and power.
Your Committee, after a review of the several reports and
resolutions, and of all the correspondence bearing upon' the
subject, are of opinion that there is no question at issue in re
spect to Treaty relations with Great Britain which cannot be
adjudicated by our Courts of law. The Constitution of this
Kingdom, according to Article 67, requires that all controver
sies growing out of the operation of our Treaties shall be sub
mitted to our Supreme Court of Justice. And although in
Great Britain Courts of Justice do not take cognizance of any
questions of claims growing'out of Treaties, yet there is no
expression emanating from Her Britannic Majesty's Govern
ment which would lead us to suppose that they would object
to the course of action prescribed by our laws. The British
Government makes no demand, and British or other foreign
residents having claims must present them to our Courts.
Your Committee will observe that the mission of our
Envoy, Mr. II. A. P. Carter, though failing in its objects, yet
was productive of advantageous results in satisfactorily ex
plaining ' the American Reciprocity Treaty to the British
Government, and thereby removing any possible ground of
Though it became a necessary consequence of the British
interpretation of the fourth Article of the Anglo-Hawaiitn
Treaty to denounce and expunge this Article from the Treaty,
yet no unfriendly feeling has followed; and by the consent of
our Government to withdraw the denunciation of the fifth
aud sixth Articles of said Treaty, an improvement in the har
mony of our relations with the Government of Her Britannic
Majesty has been the result.
Your Committee feel that thi3 is an occasion for the, Nobles
of the. Hawaiian Kingdom aud the 'Representatives of the
Hawaiian people, to declare their high appreciation of all
Treaties with Great and friendly Powers, to proclaim their
purpose to avoid all occasion for the slightest infringement of
them, and to recognize the maintenance of such Treaties a3
the surest guarantee of the independence of the Hawaiian
Kingdom and People.
In respect to the scheme of East India immigration, your
Committee have no information except the statements of our
Envoy, Mr. Carter. They regret to observe his report of the
difficulties that stand in the way of any realization of this
scheme. Still, your Committee are led to t hope, from the
friendly; spirit in which' our proposition was met by Her
Britannic Majesty's Government, that under other circum
stances and on another occasion, that Hawaii's need of. popu?
lation, and especially her disproportion of the sexes,, may bc
favorably considered and: answered in - the populous Eastern
dominions, and among the cognate races, which acknowledge
the sway of the Empress of India. " "L
J - WALTER M. GIBSON "3
! " 5 ' ' ' ' Chairman; "'
J. W. MOANAULI, r
. EDWARD PRESTON,
H31;T R CASTLE.;.
Auiolani Hale, July 2Gth," 1878.
A P P EN D I X
FROM APPENDIX TO REPORT OF MINISTER OF
FOREIGN RELATIONS TO LEGISLATIVE ASSEM
- BLY- OF 1857.
Honolulu, March 2Sth, 1S56.
Sir : Her Britannic Majesty's Government having received a copy
of a Convention concluded on the 20th of July, 1855, between the
Sandwich Islands and the United States, by which each party engages
to admit into its territories, duty, free, certain articles the produce of
the territories of the other, I have been instructed by the Earl of
Clarendon, Her Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, to ad
dress myself to the Hawaiian Government and to urge on them the
following considerations, with a view to obtain for British commerce
the same advantages which have been "conceded to the United States
by the beforementioned Convention :
The IV Article of the Treaty between Great Britain and the Sand
wich Islands of the 10th July, 1S51, stipulates that no other or higher
dunes shall be charged on the importation into the Sandwich Islands of
any article the growth, produce or manufacture of the British domin
ions than are or shall be payable on 'the like articles the growth, pro
duce or manufacture of any other foreign country. If this were the
only stipulation in the Treaty bearing upon the subject, the claim of
Great Britain to participate in the advantages conceded to the, United.
States by the Convention in'question would be clear; bat as the next
preceding Article of the Treaty of 1S51 contains a stipulation that any
favor which either party may grant to a third country shall be extended,
to the other party on corresponding terms that is, either gratuitously :
or for an equivalent compensation, as the case may be; and as the ad
vantages conceded to the United States by the Sandwich Islands are
expressly stated to be given in consideration of, and as an equivalent
for, certain reciprocal concessions on the part of the United States,
Great Britain cannot, as a matter of right, claim the same advantages
for her trade under the strict letter of the Treaty of 1S51.
Unless, however, the Convention between the Sandwich Islands and
the United States was concluded with an unfriendly feeling towards
Great Britain, which Her Majesty's Government have no reason to
suppose, it is probable that the Government of the Sandwich Islands
will be willing to extend its benefits to Great Britain in consideration -of
the terms of Article IV of the Treaty of 1S51 and of the general
liberality of the British commercial system. To such a participation
Great Britain is in equity entitled, not only because it is not her prac
tice to cut down the effect of an Article such as Article IV of the
Treaty of 1S51 by making special tariff bargains with foreign countries,
but because she had already some years ago admitted duty free eleven
out of the nineteen articles the produce of the Sandwich Islands
enumerated in, Article I of the Convention with the United States, ' '
which the United States have now only consented to admit on the same "
terms, and the remaining eight the duties levied, except in the instance
.of sugar, are Almost nominol.
The' amount of trade between Great Britain and the Sandwich j
Islands at the present time is so small that the question, so far as .
Great Britain is concerned, is one more of principle than practical
value. Even, however, if that were the full extent of the question,
exertion would be used to obtain the recognition of the principle lor'
which Her Majesty's Government contend.
But as regards Van Couver's Iiland, the evils of such a partial ar
rangement a.- that contained in the Convention will be very seriMbly
felt, inasmuch as the tish with which that Inland supplies the Sandwich
Islands will hereafter be placed at a disadvantage of ten per cent, in
comparison with American produce, and other articles will be s-:mi!ar!y
affected; and? this notwithstanding Van Couver's Island admits duty
free the produce ordinarily imported from the Sandwich Islands.
Trusting th-it the King and his Cabinet will be pleaded to tnk this" im
portant question into their early and favorable consideration,
I have the honor to t Sir, your ir.o.t humble, obedient servant,
To R. C. Wyllie, Esq , Minister of Foreign Relations.
I. ill, tw
make tin- t'xllouin Muti-iiu-nti to ibe Kin;; and t
Foreign Office, Jan. 25th,
Sir : 1 have now to supply you on your return to your po t with
instructions in regard to the recent commercial negotiations with Mr.
Carter, the Hawaiian Envoy to thi country, in connection with the
discussion between Her Majesty's Government and the Hawaiian
Government relative to the infringement of the provision? of the Treaty
of July 10th, 1S51, between Great Britain and the Sandwich Islands
by the manner in which the Reciprocity Treaty of January HOth, 1S75,
between the United States and the Sandwich Ishnd ha been put into
operation by the Hawaiian Government.
Mr. Carter had his first interview with me on the 27th of August.
I expressed to him in general terms the friendly ?entimnts of Her
Majesty's Government lowards the King and people of Hawaii ; and as
the question respecting which he had come to treat involved matters of
detail, I then referred him for the discussion of these points to Mr.
Lister and Mr. Kennedy. Previously to Mr. Carter's arrival, Mr.
Manley Hopkins, the Hawaiian Consul-General in London, had given
notice of the desire of the Hawaiian Government to terminate, under
the terms of Art. 17 of the Treaty of July 10th, 1S51, Articles 4, 5 and
6 of that treaty. He announced at the same time that a Special En
voy was coming to this country from Hawaii for the purpose of settling
the differences which had arisen, or at best of explaining fully the posi
tion of the Hawaiian Government in the matter. This communication
was made in a friendly sense, and it thus coincided, with the report on
the subject contained in your Despatch No. 2 Commercial of the 23d of
May, 1S77 ; but in its terms this notice went beyond the actual re
quirements of the case ; for while the. points in discussion were limited
to the first paragraph of Art. 4, Mr. Manley Hopkins gave notice to
terminate the whole of that Article, aud also Art. 5 and 0. Mr. Carter
explained at length in several conversations the reasons which had in
duced the Hawaiian Government to enter into the Reciprocity Treaty
of 1S75 with the United States. The question in discussion was,
however, further complicated by a tariff law passed by the Hawaiian
Legislature in 1S76, by which the Hawaiian Government, besides ex
empting the goods specified in the Schedule to Art. 2 of that Reciprocity
Treaty from payment of custom duties, had augmented the rates of
custom duties previously levied on mixed textiles, and on certain other
goods of British manufacture which are of much importance in the
trade between this country and the Hawaiian Islands. The Hawaiian
Government have thus not only infringed the stipulations of their
treaty with this country by refusing to admit British goods on the same
terras as United States goods, but they have increased the rate of the
differential duty, which, contrary to treaty, they have thns established,
by raising that duty in certain cases from ten to twenty-five per cent.,
and they have apparently proceeded to levy these duties without wait
ing for the expiration of the twelve months' notice given for the termi
nation of Art. 4 of the British Treaty of 1851. This state of things
gave Her Majesty's. Government ground for serious complaint. But
they were unwilling, if it could be avoided, to depart from the
friendly policy which they have hitherto maintained towards the Ha
waiian Islands. '"Mr. Carter then communicated, as an alternative
plan for the settlement of this matter, the accompanying drafts of
Additional Article and of Declaration. But these documents would
merely give the sanction of the two Governments to the course
which has been taken by the Hawaiian Government. They are each
alike opposed to the view of the whole question taken by Her Ma
jesty's Government, and to their interpretation of Article 4 of the
Treaty of 1851. I therefore caused you to be instructed to Mipply
a statement of the points under consideration," w ith especial refer
ence to their bearing on British commercial interests ; and, after
considering the subject, in order to act as far as possible iu accord
ance with the friendly policy of Her Majesty's Government towards
the Hawaiian Islands, without insisting as a step preliminary to ne
gotiation on the removal or modification of causes of complaint,
f addressed Mr. Carter the enclosed note,f proposing for his accept
ance a draft of Declaration, prepared with the object of making the
difference between the two Governments simply a difference of in
terpretation, and by taking that, basis to facilitate a settlement of
the points at issue. It was understood that if Mr. Carter accepted
this Declaration, he would also accede to the suggestions made in
my note of the 11th July, that the notice of termination of these
Articles should not take effect ; and it was) explained to him that the
schedule annexed to the draft of Declaration was open for lnodifica-
tion, namely, that if he so wished, the designation of goods men
tioned therein in general terms might Ik? limited to certain classes
of them, and that some of the goods mentioned,' carriages for ex
ample, might be altogether omitted from the list. Mr. Carter, liow
ever, did not proceed with the negotiation on this basis ; and at an
interview with me on the 0th of November, he communicated to
me a memorandum in which, by referring to correspondence in
1856, when a previous reciprocity treaty which was not ratified, and
therefore never came into operation, was. in discussion, aud to corre
spondence in 18G7 about consular privileges," he sought to contro
vert the interpretation given by Her Majesty's Government to Art.
4 of the Treaty of 1851. . But these matters are, in the opinion1 of
Her Majesty's Government, beside the question now at issue. The
correspondence in 1856 was incomplete, for it related to a state of
things which, as that reciprocity, treaty did noti come into operation,
in reality never arose. The consular question is obviously quite a
different subject. . : ' .
In the absence of Mr. Lister, aud as a proof of the constant desire :
of Her Majesty's Government to act in a friendly manner' towards
the Hawaiian Government, I then placed Mrn Carter in semi-official .
communication with Lord Tenterdeiu But this course likewise
failed to discover the means of arriving at a satisfactory settlement. ;
It was suggested to Mr. Carter that the Hawaiian Government!
should engage that the Schedule of the United States Treaty , of
1875, or even a modified form of that Schedule, should bo annexed
to the British Declaration proposed to be substituted for the first
paragraph of Art. 4, with a proviso that the duty of the goods com
prised in it, when of British origin, shall not, while the Reciprocity ,
Treaty of 1875 is in force, exceed 10 per cent, ad valorem ; that the
unnecessary denunciation of tho remaining part; -of Art. 4 and of
Art.' 5 and 6 should be withdrawu, and that effect should bo given
to these engagements in such maimer as would be rao in accord
ance with the Hawaiian Constitution. But Mr;, Carter was not
willing to agree to these suggestions; and as an alternative plan, he
proposed that the most favored nation , stipulation in the Treaty of
1351 should be held not to apply, to the Reciprocity Treaty of 1875
or to concessions made by treaties between the Hawaiian Islands
and countries iu or bordering .iipon the Pacific Ocean. This plan,
however, was found on examination to be the same as that proposed
iu the drafts of Additional Article and of Declaration communica
tion by Mr. Carter on the 13th September, and which, in my note of
the 25th October, he had been informed could not be adopted by (
Rcr Majesty's Government. He was accordiugl v again informed bo.
He was further asked to say whether he was willing to withdraw the
denunciation of the Articles 5 and G of the Treaty of 1851, for in
conversation the precise meaning of a statement on this point in his
memorandum of the 0th of November was not very clear. Before,
however, this answer could be ent off, he announced that he was
about to leave for the Continent, and up. to this time no reply has
been received to the eini-ofriciai letter in which this answer was
conveved to him. Having now stated the course of the recent
negotiations, I will proceed to make known to you the vie ws of Her,
Majesty's Government in the present position of the question. 1
have to observe, in the first place, that in dealing with it Her Ma-,
jesty's Government have to consider it not merely as regards the , '
relations between Great Britain and the Hawaiian' Islands. The
arrangement which may be arrived at lor . its' settlement will also
have a bearing upon the commercial relations and engagements of
this country with foreign States generally. Her Majesty's Govern
ment cannot therefore "be parties to any arrangement which would t
be opposed to their general commercial policy. They are willing to
accept fully the explanation given by you and by Mr. Carter in
regard to the Reciprocity Treaty between Hawaii and the United
States, and they have no wish that that Treaty should impair their
friendly sentiments towards Hawaii. Bnt at the same time, as a
necessary condition to this friendly understanding, Her Majesty's
Government expect that the Hawaiian Government will 'remove just
causes of complaint ; and the draft of Declaration proposed in my
note to Mr Carter of the 25th of October last not having been ac
cepted, yon must not give any pledge that the offer then made will
be repeated. In consideration of the peculiar circumstances of the
commercial relation -of the Hawaiian Islands, as explained by Mr.
Carter, and the statements made by you after communication with
British merchants interested in the "trade with those Islands, Her
Majesty's Government proposed this method ot settlement of the
points in discus-ion between the two Governments.' But it was only
as a temporary arrangement, the Reciprocity Treaty of 1875 being
limited m duration, and only under the peculiar circumstances of
the case, that Her Majesty's Government could agree to any sort of
differential treatment of" British goods, and a formal . agreement to
the reduction of the 25 per cent, duties to 10 per cent, as a maxi
mum was a necessary condition of any such arrangement. Without
reverting to questions of the interpretation of Art. 4 of the Treaty
of 1851, 'for the termination of which notice ha been formally given
by the Hawaiian Government, I have to instruct you, on your return
the Govt nmu tit f li.iw.ui :
1. H r Mnj ty (otrnniint c.inuot :wbuit the ri:;ht of tb Ha
waiian Goxernment to terminate the ojn-ratioii of the proiioiH of
that Article until th expiration of the tu b o month notice which
they have giwn. While it remain iu fori'-. Her Majet) ' Govern
ment v.irM require that it shall U- faithfully oldened, and coim--
jiu-ntlv d title im pro wily h -vied inu-t be n aid.
2. Without farther juauatioii to justify uih a ivuii. Her Ma
jity Government must ugard the abrogation of Art. b and 6 in
the Treaty f lsOl, umii the only Kint iu Ji-oihMOU i t.e tirt
paragraph of Alt. 4, a an unnccoi-ary and unfriendly act.
. Her Majesty's Go eminent must regard as aii-ially unftitrid
!y act the levying, when the treaty ttipuhitlon for most fvorrd nation
treatment in matters of tariff shall terminate, of any such difTcrrntial
rate of duty as 25 per cent, on British goods imported into the Ha
waiian Islands. Vou will give a memorandum embodying thtse three
statements to the Hawaiian Minuter with whom you may be in com
munication on your return to Honolulu, and if you think lit you may
read this dispatch to hiin and tupply hitn with a copy of it.
I am, Sir, your most obedient, humble tervaut,
Foku'Jn OrncE, October 25th, 1S77.
Sik, -I have now the honor to inhum you thnt Her Majr?fy'
Government have carefully considered the draft of an additional Ar
ticle to the Treaty of 1S51 between Great Britain and the Hawaiian
Islands, mid of a declaration which you have communicated na alterna
tive means of obvutiatin any difficulties with respect to the ititrrpre
tation of the 1th Article of the Treaty of ISjI. 1 have, however, to
inform you that Her Majofty's Government cc objections tn accepting
cither of these documents. They are, at the same time, alter consider
ing your explanation of the subject, desirous of h:iwin in their
manner of dealing with the question their friendthip lor the Kim anJ
people of the Hawaiian Mauds, and of as?itin? ai fjir as in their
power the object of your mission, to remove any difference between tht
two countries. I have accordingly the honor to communicate M you
herewith the draft of a declaration which, on the part of Hrr Majesty'e
Government, I have caused to tx prepared, with the iew to settle this
difference of interpretation. I think it right to state that it in only in
consideration of the peculiar circumstances of the commercial positidn
of the Hawaiian Islands which you have explained that Her Majenty'a
Government are willing to propose this mode of Hcttlcinent, and that
they regard their action in waiving1 the ttrict application of Article 4
of the Treaty of 1S51, as it now stands, as un rp?cial mark of friend
ship and goodwill. At the same time, 1 think it right to state, In order
to avoid any possible misunderstanding, that iu consenting to the pro-
Ssed declaration and the alterations in the terms of Article 4, Her
ajesty's Government maintain their interpretation of it while il re
mains in force, and that consequently any claims preferred tn account
of excessive duties levied in contravention of that Article of the Tronty
should be entertained by the Hawaiian Government.
I have the honour to be, with the highest consideration, Sir,
Your most olcdicnt, humble crrant,
DKAIT Of DIXLAK ATION.
The Government of Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom
of Great Britain and His Majesty the King of the Hawaiian Islands
being desirous of obviating any difficulties which nmv arise in . regard
to the interpretation of Article 1 of the Treaty of Vriendhin, Com-
merce ana navigation between ircat jiritain una tne Hawaiian
Islands, of the 10th of July, I S3 1 , tho undersigned, duly authorized for
the purpose, have agreed upon the following provisions :
His Hawaiian Majesty engages to recommend to tho Legislative
Assembly of the Hawaiian Islands that the duty on the goods ipccified
in the schedule attached to this declaration, the produce or manufacture
or coming from the United Kingdom of Great Britain aud Ireland, or
of British Colonies or possessions, shall, upon their importation into
the Hawaiian Islands, not exceed 10 per cent, ad valorem. Aaaoon as
an enactment to the above effect shall have been passed by tha
Hawaiian Legislative Assembly, the stipulations in regard to import
and export duties contained in Article 4 of the Treaty ot tho 10th July,
1851, shall become and remain inoperative as long as the said law shall
be in force. .
Tissues of all materials, pure or mixed.
Metals of all kinds, raw or manufactured, or in any stage of manu
facture, pure or alloyed. . '
Cutlery, tools, and agricultural and other implements, with or with
out handles of wood or other material.
Machinery, complete or in pieces. 1
Saddlery and harness ; floor oibcloth.
Hats and caps of all kind.
Boots and shoes.
Earthen, glass and china ware.
Colors, paints and turpentine. ' '
Cobra, linseed and cotton-seed oils.
Soaps, scented or not.
Carriages, entire or the material" of. ' ' i
Fire-bricks and fire-clay, Portland cement, lumber.
KxiriniT 0. '
Extract of JsW r of Hi JCr. J!. C. Wyllie, Minister of Eur Jqn
'elation, to Guntavc A. 7! intr, Eaj. Consul of PniBtia..
Honolulu, 23 Eebrtutry, 16."7. . -
"However brought about the important fact is that Great Britain'
voluntarily sent out the draft of treaty concluded on the I Oth July,'
1S51, between H. B. M.'a Consul General William Miller and me, of
which I enclose copy marked No. 6." . i
Km mi it I).
1' ' m
Extract of JjIU r of on. )anhl IVtbtftr to fawaiiat CommU".
nloiu.ru lichard and Ifaolilio, at lVariinytou.. )r.c. 19, JQj2.
"The United States have regarded the ex'sting authorities in' the''
Sandwich Islands as a Government suited to the condition of the "
people and resting on their choice ; and the President is of 'opinion'
that the interests of all the commercial nations require that that
Government should not be interfered with by Foreign Powers.1 ' ''''
' Of the vessels which visit the Islands, it is known that a great ma- '
jority belong to the United Stiles. The United States, therefore, are
more interested in the fate of the Islands and of their Government thin
any other nation can be ; and this consideration induces the President "
to be quite willing to declare, as the sense of the Government' of tio !
United States, that the Government of the Sandwich Islands ooght to
be respected ; that no Power ought either to take possession of the
Islands as a conquest, or for the purpose of colonization ; and that no '
Power ought to seek for any undue control over the existing Govern
ment, or any exclusive privileges or preferences in matters of commerce."
Extract of Co)j of tin, hixjmtch addrwjd by . K Eos., Jsg.,
the jiritish Jfinif:r ot the Court of "Vahinylun, to the Ion.
. J'. lTihnr, Secretary of State, ,ime 25ti, 1313. - j
" All that has appeared requisite to Her Majesty's Government ha '
been that other Powers shall not cxerci.se there a greater influence than '
that possessed by Great Britain." ' ' ''' '
Ertract of Cojy of tht lion. A. I'. Lrfhhur' hjatct in rrjdy to
that of JL S. Eox, E., th. linl'oh Minuter at. the Court of .
Wafhinytou. July 5th, IS 13. . ,
Seeking to establish no undue ad-antage in the Sandwich Ihtanda
for citizens of the United States at the expense of other Powers, the '
President receives with much pleasure tho assurance contained in Mr.
Fox's note, that none such are sought for Gnat Britain. He cannot
doubt that the recognition of the independence and the sovereignty of !
those Islands will be found altogether compatible with etery just claim
of Great Britain, while it will best conduce to the interests of the '
Islands themselves and of all nations having intercourse with them. '
K Mil hit K.
Ei-ti"'tH from fun. E II. Albn't IhjHitrh to Mr. Wyllie, 4th
Etbrunry, in relation to IZ'j-ifiunu'ty ''rutty. 1S."7.
" The legal objection in the Senate arises from the mof-:t favored na
tion clause in other treaties.
" I have seen a great many of the Senators when I camo here, that
most favored nation clause met me everywhere. , .
" In relation to the treaty 1 can only hay that the only serious obsta
cle se-ms to be the mo?t favored nation clause in other treaties.1'
4 ' ' '
EXTUACTS FROM TARIFF OF VICTORIA, 1877. '
Twenty per cent, ad valorem : . , "
. 1 rtielen of . jotarel. '
Aiiffms. lireeehe. euats. :aiC. elouks. fun, froekn . hoods arid
, .... , , A , r f-,J---.
hat, fooha, jackets, mantlet, frcarft, nig,ht-drestcs, petticoat, ruffle
robes, nhirt of all kinds, htayx, hhawls, trowser, vest, men, wo- .
men's and chiMren'h underclothing, tiilkf of all kinds and in part. !'
Carriages and carts, furniture, agricultural implement, ' mt-j' '
chinery, manufacture.1 of metals of all kind, manufactured sta
tionery, musical instruments, woodenwaro of all kinds.
Ten r-EU cent. ai valouem:
Caqeting and druggeting, clocks, combs, glove, watche, M oolcn
Almonds, bacon, biscuit, 2d per lb; ale, ortcr and other beer,
9d per gallon; bags and sacks, Is per Uoz; boots and bhoes (men),