Statehood

December 10, 2016 by Peter T Young 1 Comment

Revolt, Republic, US Annexation, Statehood

Revolt, Republic … then US Annexation, then Statehood … sound familiar? … How about this? Anglo-American insurrectionists sneaked into and captured the lightly defended government facility; the leading revolutionaries signed a declaration.

Shortly after, several hundred insurrectionists, assembled and declared it a “free and independent state,” adopted a constitution and formed a Republic.

The leader of the fledging Republic, in addressing the new legislature, stated, “Called by your joint and unanimous suffrages, to fill the office of chief magistrate, under the constitution adopted by the people … believing it to be the duty of every citizen at this moment implicitly to obey the call of his country.”

“Placed like you, but as to day, to carry into effect a new system of government, little more it is presumed, might be expected from me at the moment of my entering into office, than the ordinary professions of a governor, addressing the immediate representatives of the people …”

“… yet my solicitude, during these first hours of the convulsive birth of our infant republic, induces me on the present occasion, to ask something more of your attention and indulgence. …”

“We are then entitled to independence, and wherever the voice of justice and humanity can be heard, our declaration, and our just rights will be respected.”

“Our brave volunteers, conducting themselves with temperance and fortitude, like the patriotic chief who is to lead them, will teach the enemy, that Americans understanding the principles of liberty and a free government, are ever ready to sacrifice their lives in its defence; for our cause is too glorious, to be disgraced by fear or by submission.”

“The genius of Washington, the immortal founder of the liberties of America, stimulates that return, and would frown upon our cause, should we attempt to change its course.” They sought annexation to the US.

The US President proclaimed, “a crisis has at length arrived subversive of the order … whereby a failure of the United States to take the said territory into its possession may lead to events ultimately contravening the views of both parties”.

“Considering, moreover, that under these peculiar and imperative circumstances a forbearance on the part of the United States to occupy the territory in question, and thereby guard against the confusions and contingencies which threaten it, might be construed into a dereliction of their title or an insensibility to the importance of the stake …”

“… considering that in the hands of the United States it will not cease to be a subject of fair and friendly negotiation and adjustment; considering, finally, that the acts of Congress, though contemplating a present possession by a foreign authority, have contemplated also an eventual possession of the said territory by the United States, and are accordingly so framed as in that case to extend in their operation to the same”.

Then the president proclaimed, “in pursuance of these weighty and urgent considerations, have deemed it right and requisite that possession should be taken of the said territory in the name and behalf of the United States.”

Shortly thereafter, the US Senate and the House of Representatives passed a joint resolution authorizing the President to ‘occupy and hold all of the tract of country.’

In his subsequent State of the Union address, the President stated, “Among the events growing out of the state of the … Monarchy, … a situation produced exposing the country to ulterior events which might essentially affect the rights and welfare of the Union.”

This wasn’t the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands in 1898, it was a revolution by American insurrectionists, Presidential Proclamation and subsequent Congressional Act (House and Senate) annexing West Florida to the US in 1811.

In 1779-81 Spain acquired West Florida, as well as East Florida by right of conquest, confirmed by treaty of 1783. The Treaty of Paris (ending the American Revolutionary War in 1783) transferred British control of East and West Florida back to Spain.

West Florida stretched from the Mississippi River eastward to the Perdido River (the current border of the American states of Alabama and Florida,) up to the 31st parallel.

Things were peaceful until 1808, when Spain appointed Col. Charles Delassus as governor. The inefficiency and corruption of officials under him threatened the prosperity of American colonists in West Florida, who presented demands for political reform.

In the predawn fog of September 23, 1810, about 50 men, led by Revolutionary War veteran Philemon Thomas, walked in the open gate of Fort San Carlos in Baton Rouge. An additional 25 men on horseback rode through a gap in the fort’s wall.

Spanish soldiers discharged a handful of muskets before Thomas’ men let go a single volley that killed or wounded five Spaniards. The remaining soldados surrendered or fled. (Smithsonian)

The beginning of the ‘Free and Independent State of West Florida’ dates with the assembling of the convention, September 23, 1810. (Fulwar Skipwith was elected Governor.) US President James Madison issued the West Florida Proclamation on October 27, 1810.

On December 10, 1810, the Republic of West Florida’s lone star came down and the Stars and Stripes took its place. For the first time, the United States had acquired significant territory from another sovereignty without war or compensation. (Smithsonian) Texas later used the Lone Star layout for its flag.)

President Madison then sent to Congress a secret message regarding the occupation of the Floridas, in response to which Congress, in secret session, passed on January 15, 1811, a resolution which recited that:

“Taking into view the peculiar situation of Spain and of her American provinces, and considering the influence which the destiny of the territory adjoining the southern border of the United States may have upon their security, tranquility and commerce.”

“Be it Resolved, That the United States, under the peculiar circumstances of the existing crisis, cannot, without serious inquietude, see any part of the said territory pass into the hands of any foreign power …”

“… and that a due regard for their own safety compels them to provide, under certain contingencies, for the temporary occupation of the said territory; they at the same time declaring that the said territory shall, in their hands, remain subject to future negotiations.” (US State Department)

January 22, 1812, by act of Congress, Louisiana was admitted to the American Union as a State. April 14 following, an act adding that part of West Florida lying between the Pearl and Mississippi rivers to Louisiana as constituted, was approved by the President. (Chambers)

In 1828 (in which the court, in speaking of the power of Congress to establish a Territorial Government in Florida until it should become a State,) the Supreme Court declared:

“In the mean time, Florida continues to be a Territory of the United States, governed by that clause of the Constitution which empowers Congress ‘to make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States.’”

“Perhaps the power of governing a Territory belonging to the United States, which has not, by becoming a State, acquired the means of self-government, may result necessarily from the facts that it is not within the jurisdiction of any particular State, and is within the power and jurisdiction of the United States.”

“The right to govern may be the inevitable consequence of the right to acquire territory. Whichever may be the source whence the power may be derived, the possession of it is unquestionable.” (Canter Decision – Decision also cited in Dred Scot Decision)

Flag_of_the_Republic_of_West_Florida_(1810)

Sketch map showing the territorial changes of ‘West Florida’-1898-WC

West Florida (including Pensacola, which was not part of the US claim) in the hands of Spain-1806-

Congress Joint Resolution Annexing West Florida-Feb_12, 1812

August 21, 2016 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

“Hawai‘i is America in a microcosm – a melting pot of many racial and national origins, from which has been produced a common nationality, a common patriotism, a common faith in freedom and in the institutions of America.” (Senator Herbert
Lehman; GPO)

On June 27, 1959, Hawaiʻi registered voters voted on three propositions related to Statehood:

Shall the following propositions, as set forth in Public Law 86-3 entitled “An Act to provide for the admission of the State of Hawaii into the Union” be adopted?

1. Shall Hawaii immediately be admitted into the Union as a State?
Yes – 132,773 (94.3%)
No – 7,971 (5.7%)

2. The boundaries of the State of Hawaii shall be as prescribed in the Act of Congress approved March 18, 1959, and all claims of this State to any areas of land or sea outside the boundaries so prescribed are hereby irrevocably relinquished to the United States.
Yes – 132,194 (94.5%)
No – 7,654 (5.5%)

3. All provisions of the Act of Congress approved March 18, 1959, reserving rights or powers to the United States, as well as those prescribing the terms or conditions of the grants of lands or other property therein made to the State of Hawaii are consented by said State and its people.
Yes – 132,281 (94.6%)
No – 7,582 (5.4%)

(There was a 93.6% voter turnout for the General election – as compared to generally less than 50% in recent times – total turnout for the 2016 primary election was only 34.8% (a new low.))

While Hawaiʻi was the 50th State to be admitted into the union on August 21, 1959, Statehood is celebrated annually on the third Friday in August to commemorate the anniversary of the 1959 admission of Hawaiʻi into the Union.

Contrary to comments by some, the Crown and Government lands were not ‘stolen’ from the people with Territorial status, Statehood or any other change in governance. Those lands have been consistently recognized as part of the public domain or government property, as decided by the Hawai‘i Supreme Court.

That court noted, “In 1840 (Kamehameha III) granted the first Constitution by which he declared and established the equality before the law of all his subjects, chiefs, and people alike.”

“By that Constitution, he voluntarily divested himself of some of his powers and attributes as an absolute Ruler, and conferred certain political rights upon his subjects, admitting them to a share with himself in legislation and government. This was the beginning of a government as contradistinguished from the person of the King …”

“… who was thenceforth to be regarded rather as the executive chief and political head of the nation than its absolute governor. Certain kinds of public property began to be recognized as Government property, and not as the King’s.”

The Court noted, “These lands are to be in the perpetual keeping of the Legislative Council (Nobles and Representatives) or in that of the superintendents of said lands, appointed by them from time to time …”

“… and shall be regulated, leased, or sold, in accordance with the will of said Nobles and Representatives, for the good of the Hawaiian Government, and to promote the dignity of the Hawaiian Crown.”

The Court found, “while it was clearly the intention of Kamehameha III to protect the lands which he reserved to himself out of the domain which had been acquired by his family through the prowess and skill of his father, the conqueror, from the danger of being treated as public domain or Government property …”

“… it was also his intention to provide that those lands should descend to his heirs and successors, the future wearers of the crown which the conquerer had won; and we understand the act of 7th June, 1848, as having secured both those objects.” (Supreme Court Decision in the Matter of the Estate of Kamehameha IV, 1864)

Following the overthrow, these lands remained for public benefit when they were transferred through changing governments and governance to the Provisional Government, Republic, Territory and State.

This was affirmed by the US Court of Claims noting, “The constitution of the Republic of Hawai‘i, as respects the crown lands, provided as follows: ‘That portion of the public domain heretofore known as crown land is hereby declared to have been heretofore, and now to be, the property of the Hawaiian Government …” (Lili‘uokalani v The United States, 1910)

Beneficiaries of these lands have also not changed – those lands remain part of the public trust for the benefit of Hawai‘i citizens. The government and governance of the Kingdom through Statehood has not been, nor are they now, based on race. People of many races have been and continue to be citizens.

Under the Admission Act, about 1.2-million acres are to “be held by (the) State as a public trust” to promote one or more of five purposes:
1. support of the public schools and other public educational institutions
2. betterment of the conditions of native Hawaiians (per the Hawaiian Homes Act, 1920)
3. development of farm and home ownership on as widespread a basis as possible
4. making of public improvements
5. provision of lands for public use

So, as Statehood is celebrated in the Islands, the lands that were in the public domain over the changing levels and entities of government and governance continue to be held in public trust, for all citizens (just as in the times of the constitutional monarchy.)

“Today, one of the deepest needs of mankind is the need to feel a sense of kinship one with another. Truly all mankind belongs together; from the beginning all mankind has been called into being, nourished, watched over by the love of God.”

“So that the real Golden Rule is Aloha. This is the way of life we shall affirm.”

“Let us affirm ever what we really are – for Aloha is the spirit of God at work in you and in me and in the world, uniting what is separated, overcoming darkness and death, bringing new light and life to all who sit in the darkness of fear, guiding the feet of mankind into the way of peace.”

“Thus may our becoming a State mean to our nation and the world, and may it reaffirm that which was planted in us one hundred and thirty-nine years ago: ‘Fear not, for behold I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.’” (Reverend Abraham K Akaka; Given on: Friday, March 13, 1959)

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

usa-flag

August 12, 2016 by Peter T Young 3 Comments

Annexation

The Committee of Safety, formally the Citizen’s Committee of Public Safety, was a 13-member group also known as the Annexation Club; they started in 1887 as the Hawaiian League.

The Committee of Safety was made up of 6-Hawaiian citizens (naturalized or by birth;) 5-Americans, 1-Englishman and 1-German (of the 13, none were missionaries and only 3 had missionary family ties.)

“Queen Lili‘uokalani attempted on Saturday, Jan. 14 (1893,) to promulgate a new Constitution, depriving foreigners of the right of franchise and abrogating the existing House of Nobles, at the same time giving her the power of appointing a new House.”

“That meeting unanimously adopted resolutions condemning the action of the Queen and authorizing the committee to take into consideration whatever was necessary for the public safety.” (New York Times, January 28, 1893)

On January 16, 1893, the Committee of Safety wrote a letter to John L Stevens, American Minister, that stated: “We, the undersigned citizens and residents of Honolulu, respectfully represent that, in view of recent public events in this Kingdom …”

“… culminating in the revolutionary acts of Queen Liliʻuokalani on Saturday last, the public safety is menaced and lives and property are in peril, and we appeal to you and the United States forces at your command for assistance.”

Then, “[a] so-called Committee of Safety, a group of professionals and businessmen, with the active assistance of John Stevens, the United States Minister to Hawaii, acting with the United States Armed Forces, replaced the [Hawaiian] monarchy with a provisional government.” (US Supreme Court; Hawaii v OHA, 2008)

On January 18, 1893, letters acknowledging (de facto) the Provisional Government were prepared by the Imperial German Consulate, Austro-Hungarian Consulate, Consul for Italy, Russian acting consul, Vice-Consul for Spain, Consulate of The Netherlands, Royal Danish Consulate, Consulate of Belgium, Consul for Mexico, Consulate of Chile, Office of the Peruvian Consulate, Consul-General and Charge d’Affaires of Portugal, Consulate and Commissariat of France and Chinese Commercial Agency.

On January 19, 1893, the British Legation and His Imperial Japanese Majesty’s Consulate-General acknowledged the Hawaiian monarchy has been abrogated and a Provisional Government established.

The Provisional Government convened a constitutional convention, approved a new constitution and the Republic of Hawaiʻi was established on July 4, 1894. Shortly after (from August 1894 through January 1895,) a number of letters of formal diplomatic recognition (de jure) of the Republic of Hawai‘i were conveyed to the Republic of Hawai‘i President Sanford Dole.

These included formal letters from Austria/Hungary, Belgium, Brazil, Britain, Chile, China, France, Germany/Prussia, Guatemala, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Netherlands, Norway and Sweden, Peru, Portugal, Russia, Spain , Switzerland and the United States. (These were countries that had prior agreements and treaties with the Hawaiian Monarchy.)

An August 7, 1894 ‘office copy’ letter notes US President Grover Cleveland wrote to Republic of Hawai‘i President Sanford B Dole, saying “… I cordially reciprocate the sentiments you express for the continuance of the friendly relations which have existed between the United States and the Hawaiian islands”.

In his annual ‘Message to Congress’ (1895,) President Cleveland noted, “Since communicating the voluminous correspondence in regard to Hawai‘i and the action taken by the Senate and House of Representatives on certain questions submitted to the judgment and wider discretion of Congress …”

“… the organization of a government in place of the provisional arrangement which followed the deposition of the Queen has been announced, with evidence of its effective operation. The recognition usual in such cases has been accorded the new Government.”

Republic of Hawai‘i President Sanford Dole sent a delegation to Washington in 1894, seeking annexation to the US. John Sherman, US Secretary of State, prepared a report reviewing the negotiation between representatives of the Republic of Hawai‘i and the US, and provisions of the Treaty of Annexation. That report (June 15, 1897) noted, in part:

“The undersigned, Secretary of State, has the honor to lay before the President, for submission to the Senate, should it be deemed for the public interest so to do, a treaty, signed in the city of Washington on the 16th instant by the undersigned and by the fully empowered representative of the Republic of Hawaii …”

“… whereby the islands constituting the said Republic, and all their dependencies, are fully and absolutely ceded to the United States of America forever.”

“As time passed and the plan of union with the United States became an uncertain contingency, the organization of the Hawaiian Commonwealth underwent necessary changes; the temporary character of its first Government gave place to a permanent scheme under a constitution framed by the representatives of the electors of the islands …”

“… administration by an executive council not chosen by suffrage, but self-appointed, was succeeded by an elective and parliamentary regime, and the ability of the new Government to hold – as the Republic of Hawaii – an independent place in the family of sovereign States, preserving order at home and fulfilling international obligations abroad, has been put to the proof.”

“Recognized by the powers of the earth, sending and receiving envoys, enforcing respect for the law, and maintaining peace within its island borders, Hawaii sends to the United States, not a commission representing a successful revolution, but the accredited plenipotentiary of a constituted and firmly established sovereign State.”

“… the Republic of Hawaii approaches the United States as an equal, and points for its authority to that provision of article 32 of the constitution promulgated July 24, 1894, whereby …”

“The President (of the Republic of Hawai‘i,) with the approval of the cabinet, is hereby expressly authorized and empowered to make a treaty of political or commercial union between the Republic of Hawaii and the United States of America, subject to the ratification of the Senate.” (The Hawaiian resolution for ratification of the annexation treaty was unanimously adopted by the Senate of the Republic of Hawai‘i on September 9, 1897.)

“Turning, then, to the various practical forms of political union, the several phases of a protectorate, an offensive and defensive alliance, and a national guarantee, were passed in review. In all of these the independence of the subordinate state is the distinguishing feature, and with it the assumption by the paramount state of responsibility without domain.”

“There remained, therefore, the annexation of the islands and their complete absorption into the political system of the United States as the only solution satisfying all the given conditions and promising permanency and mutual benefit. The present treaty has been framed on that basis”.

“As to most of these, the negotiators have been constrained and limited by the constitutional powers of the Government of the United States. As in previous instances when the United States has acquired territory by treaty, it has been necessary to reserve all the organic provisions for the action of Congress.”

“If this was requisite in the case of the transfer to the United States of a part of the domain of a titular sovereign, as in the cession of Louisiana by France, of Florida by Spain, or of Alaska by Russia, it is the more requisite when the act is not cession, but union, involving the complete incorporation of an alien sovereignty into the body politic of the United States.”

“For this the only precedent of our political history is found in the uncompleted treaty concluded during President Grant’s Administration, November 29, 1869, for the annexation of the Dominican Republic to the United States.”

“Following that example, the treaty now signed by the plenipotentiaries of the United States and the Republic of Hawaii reserves to the Congress of the United States the determination of all questions affecting the form of government of the annexed territory, the citizenship and elective franchise of its inhabitants, and the manner in which the laws of the United States are to be extended to the islands.”

“In order that this independence of the Congress shall be complete and unquestionable, and pursuant to the recognized doctrine of public law that treaties expire with the independent life of the contracting State, there has been introduced, out of abundant caution, an express proviso for the determination of all treaties heretofore concluded by Hawaii with foreign nations and the extension to the islands of the treaties of the United States.”

“This leaves Congress free to deal with such especial regulation of the contract labor system of the islands as circumstances may require. There being no general provision of existing statutes to prescribe the form of government for newly incorporated territory, it was necessary to stipulate, as in the Dominican precedent …”

“… for continuing the existing machinery of government and laws in the Hawaiian Islands until provision shall be made by law for the government, as a Territory of the United States, of the domain thus incorporated into the Union …”

“… but, having in view the peculiar status created in Hawaii by laws enacted in execution of treaties heretofore concluded between Hawaii and other countries, only such Hawaiian laws are thus provisionally continued as shall not be incompatible with the Constitution or the laws of the United States or with the provisions of this treaty.” (US Secretary of State Sherman, June 15, 1897)

Meanwhile, the breaking of diplomatic relations with Spain as a result of her treatment of Cuba so completely absorbed public attention that the matter of Hawaiian annexation seemed to have been forgotten.

The war drama moved swiftly. The destruction of the battleship Maine in Havana harbor precipitated matters, and on April 25, 1898, President McKinley signed the resolutions declaring that a state of war existed between the United States and Spain.

On May 5, Representative Francis Newlands, of Nevada, offered a joint resolution addressing the annexation of Hawai‘i. Though considerable opposition to annexation was still manifested in the House, the Newlands resolutions were finally passed.

The resolutions were immediately reported to the Senate, which had been discussing the treaty for nearly a year. That body referred them to its Committee on Foreign Relations, which in turn at once favorably reported them.

On June 15, 1898, the Newlands resolution passed the House by a vote of 209 to 91; the vote on the Newlands Resolution in the Senate was 42 to 21 (2/3 of the votes by Senators were in favor of the resolution, a significantly greater margin was cast by Representatives in the House.) (Cyclopedic Review of Current History, 4th Quarter 1898)

The US Constitution, Article II, Section 2 states: “(The President) shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur …” The following day, July 7, 1898, President McKinley signed the Newlands Resolution it into law.

“There was no ‘conquest’ by force in the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands nor ‘holding as conquered territory;’ they (Republic of Hawai‘i) came to the United States in the same way that Florida did, to wit, by voluntary cession”.

On August 12, 1898, there were ceremonial functions held in Honolulu at which the Hawaiian government was formally notified by the United States minister plenipotentiary and envoy extraordinary of the adoption and approval of the joint resolution aforesaid, and at which the Hawaiian government made, an unequivocal transfer and cession of its sovereignty and property. (Territorial Supreme Court; Albany Law Journal)

On June 27, 1959, when the matter of Statehood was put to a popular vote, Hawaiʻi registered voters voted on the question of Statehood (there was a 93.6% voter turnout for the General election – as compared to less than 50% today.)

Shall the following proposition, as set forth in Public Law 86-3 entitled ‘An Act to provide for the admission of the State of Hawaii into the Union’ be adopted? 1. Shall Hawaii immediately be admitted into the Union as a State? – 94.3% voted in support.

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

American_flags_on_Iolani_Palace,_Annexation_ceremony_(PP-36-1-008)

Annexation_of_Hawaii-PP-35-8-016-400

Annexation_of_Hawaii_(PP-35-8-008)

Annexation_of_Hawaii_(PP-35-8-011)

Annexation_of_Hawaii_(PP-35-8-022)

Annexation_of_Hawaii-PP-35-8-017

Annexation_of_Hawaii–PP-35-8-025

Annexation_of_Hawaii-PP-36-1-018

Annexation-Here to Stay-PCA-July 14, 1898

June 27, 2016 by Peter T Young 1 Comment

Recognition

In 1893, “[a] so-called Committee of Safety, a group of professionals and businessmen, with the active assistance of John Stevens, the United States Minister to Hawai‘i, acting with the United States Armed Forces, replaced the [Hawaiian] monarchy with a provisional government.” (US Supreme Court; Hawaii v OHA, 2008) The Provisional Government was soon recognized by foreign states.

“The term ‘recognition,’ when used in the context of recognition of States and governments in international law, may have several different meanings. It may indicate the recognizing State’s willingness to enter into official relations with a new State or government, or manifest its opinion on the legal status of a new entity or authority, or both.”

“The subject has been complicated by the introduction of several variants of the term. Distinctions between ‘de facto recognition,’ ‘diplomatic recognition’ and ‘de jure recognition’ may be traced back to the secession of the Spanish provinces in South America in early 19th century.”

“Like ‘recognition,’ these terms can be given meaning only by establishing the intention of the authority using them within the factual and legal context of each case. Recognition is a unilateral act performed by the recognizing State’s government. It may be express or implicit.” (Talmon)

“In his Allgemeine Staatslehre (General Theory of the State), published in 1900, Georg Jellinek developed the doctrine of the three elements of statehood, according to which a State exists if a population, on a certain territory, is organized under an effective public authority.”

“Although some authors have criticized this definition as treating the State as a purely factual phenomenon, it is still the definition most commonly found in State practice.”

“There are usually two requirements regarding the element of ‘public authority:’ internally, it must exercise the highest authority, that is, it must possess the power to determine the constitution of the State (internal sovereignty) …”

“… externally, it must be independent of other States (external sovereignty). Independence of other States refers to legal, not factual, independence; that is, the State must only be subject to international law, not to the laws of any other State.”

“When a State recognizes a new ‘government,’ it usually acknowledges a person or group of persons as competent to act as the organ of the State and to represent it in its international relations. The only criterion in international law for the recognition of an authority as the government of a State is its exercise of effective control over the State’s territory.” (Talmon)

The Hawaiian Kingdom became recognized through statements and treaties with Austria-Hungary (June 18, 1875), now Austria and Hungary; Belgium (October 4, 1862); Bremen (March 27, 1854) now Germany; Denmark (Oct. 19, 1846); France (September 8, 1858); French Tahiti (November 24, 1853); Germany (March 25, 1879); Great Britain (March 26, 1846); Great Britain’s New South Wales (March 10, 1874), now Australia …

… Hamburg (January 8, 1848), now Germany; Italy (July 22, 1863); Japan (Aug. 19, 1871, January 28, 1886); Netherlands (October 16, 1862); Portugal (May 5, 1882); Russia (June 19, 1869); Samoa (March 20, 1887); Spain (October 9, 1863); Sweden and Norway (April 5, 1855), now separate States; Switzerland (July 20, 1864); and the United States of America (December 20, 1849.) (Sai)

Then came the overthrow of the constitutional monarchy in 1893. Following the overthrow, Consulate offices in Honolulu recognized the Provisional Government as the “de facto government of the Hawaiian Islands.” John L Stevens, for the US Legation, acknowledged the Provisional Government on January 17, 1893.

On January 18, 1893, the Imperial German Consulate, Austro-Hungarian Consulate, Consul for Italy, Russian acting consul, Vice-Consul for Spain, Consulate of The Netherlands, Royal Danish Consulate, Consulate of Belgium, Consul for Mexico, Consulate of Chile, Office of the Peruvian Consulate, Consul-General and Charge d’Affaires of Portugal, Consulate and Commissariat of France and Chinese Commercial Agency wrote letters acknowledging (de facto) the Provisional Government. On January 19, 1893, the British Legation and His Imperial Japanese Majesty’s Consulate.

With respect to transformation of the State status in Hawai‘i, the Provisional Government of Hawai‘i then established voter eligibility, convened a constitutional convention, approved a new constitution and the Republic of Hawaiʻi was established on July 4, 1894.

Shortly after (from August 1894 through January 1895,) a number of letters of formal diplomatic recognition (de jure) of the Republic of Hawai‘i were conveyed to the Republic of Hawai‘i President Sanford Dole.

An August 7, 1894 letter notes US President Grover Cleveland wrote to Republic of Hawai‘i President Sanford B Dole, saying “… I cordially reciprocate the sentiments you express for the continuance of the friendly relations which have existed between the United States and the Hawaiian islands”.

Republic of Hawai‘i President Sanford Dole sent a delegation to Washington in 1894, seeking annexation to the US. Regarding the annexation discussions, US Secretary of State John Sherman noted …

“(T)he plan of union with the United States became an uncertain contingency, the organization of the Hawaiian Commonwealth underwent necessary changes; the temporary character of its first (Provisional) Government gave place to a permanent scheme (Republic) under a constitution framed by the representatives of the electors of the islands …”

“Recognized by the powers of the earth, sending and receiving envoys, enforcing respect for the law, and maintaining peace within its island borders …”

“… Hawaii sends to the United States, not a commission representing a successful revolution, but the accredited plenipotentiary of a constituted and firmly established sovereign State. … the Republic of Hawai‘i approaches the United States as an equal”. (US Secretary of State Sherman, June 15, 1897)

On August 12, 1898, there were ceremonial functions held in Honolulu at which the Hawaiian government was formally notified by the US minister plenipotentiary and envoy extraordinary of the adoption and approval of the joint resolution aforesaid, and at which the Hawaiian government made, an unequivocal transfer and cession of its sovereignty and property. (Territorial Supreme Court; Albany Law Journal)

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger