USA Acquires Hawaii

This series has five easy 5 minute installments. This first installment: Grover Cleveland’s Administration and Hawii.

Introduction
When Captain James Cook discovered, in 1778, the Hawaiian Islands where he met his death at the hands of native warriors, he could hardly have dreamed that in a century and a quarter they would become commercially and strategically the key to the Pacific Ocean. Nor is it likely that the eminent missionary Titus Coan, who presided there over the largest parish in Christendom, thought of the islands as ever to become a closely connected part of the civilized world.  They were once an important rendezvous for the whale-ships that sailed from New England ports around Cape Horn on their way to the northern Pacific and Bering Sea. After this industry had been destroyed by the production of petroleum on a large scale, trade languished for a time until the development of the sugar industry brought them again into commercial prominence. As late as 1855 a treaty of reciprocity that was concluded between this island kingdom and the United States failed of ratification by the Senate; and twelve years later another failed in the same way. But after the purchase of Alaska by the United States, and after the acquisition of the Philippines, and after the laying of Pacific cables had begun, the eyes of the commercial world were fully opened, and it soon became only a question what great Power would acquire either sovereignty or suzerainty over the Hawaiian Islands. When William McKinley became President, the opposition to their annexation to the United States had largely disappeared, and it was an easy task for his Administration to raise there the flag that is not likely ever to be hauled down so long as civilization endures.

This selection is from America in Hawaii: A History of United States Influence in the Hawaiian Islands by Edmund James Carpenter published in 1899. For works benefiting from the latest research see the “More information” section at the bottom of these pages.

Time: August 12, 1898
Place: Hawaii

The attitude assumed by President Cleveland in regard to Hawaiian annexation did not, upon the whole, find approval in the United States. The discussion, in general, was divided upon party lines. There were those, it is true, in the Republican party who, being opposed to any further extension of our territorial boundaries, heartily approved his position, while there were others in the Democratic party who, without regard to the question of annexation, as heartily disapproved of the attempt to abrogate the Provisional Government and restore the fallen Queen. Whether the Hon. Albert S. Willis, United States Minister at Hawaii, received actual orders from Washington to attempt to carry his instructions by that display of arms, or whether that feint was a plan of his own device, probably no one ever will know. A diligent search of the archives of the State Department fails to disclose copies of any secret instructions issued to Minister Willis to that effect. If any such instructions were issued, no record of them has been preserved.

It soon became known that President Cleveland, before receiving the complete acquiescence of the ex- Queen to his conditions, had commended “this subject to the extended powers and wide discretion of the Congress.” And from this time the President appeared to relinquish all active interest in the control of the relations between the United States and the Hawaiian Islands, and to content himself with simply transmitting to Congress from time to time the routine correspondence between the Secretary of State and his Minister.

The relations of Minister Willis with the Hawaiian Government, naturally, were greatly strained. In his strictly diplomatic relation Mr. Willis had unquestionably engaged in plots against the Government to which he was accredited. And yet his consultations with the ex- Queen, directly and through her friend, were not his personal acts, but were held under specific instructions from his Government. This fact, although well known in the city, did not serve to lift from the American Minister the popular odium. Beyond doubt, according to diplomatic usage, the Hawaiian Government would have been fully justified in demanding his recall, if not, indeed, in giving him a summary dismissal. It is probable, however, that it did not wish to exasperate the Government at Washington by assuming too antagonistic an attitude. It was also evident that, were a change demanded, there could be no assurance that any more acceptable man would be sent by the Administration then in power. And, so far as his personal characteristics were concerned, Minister Willis was perfectly acceptable.

It was, perhaps, unfortunate that Minister Willis should not have been at greater pains, now that the crisis was passed, to meet the members of the Hawaiian Government upon their own ground, and assume the position in the social life of Honolulu to which his official station entitled him. In an extended letter addressed to him by Mr. Sanford B. Dole, President of the Hawaiian Republic (1894-1898), in response to his demand for a statement of the particulars wherein the Provisional Government complained of his course since his arrival, Mr. Dole wrote : ” During your nearly two months’ residence in this city you and your family have declined the customary social courtesies usually extended to those occupying your official position, on the specified ground that it was not deemed best under existing circumstances to accept such civilities.” On the first anniversary of the formation of the Provisional Government, January 17, 1894, a formal invitation was sent to the American Minister to be present at the public exercises. This was somewhat curtly declined. In consequence of the attitude taken by Mr. Willis, in addition to his open opposition in his official capacity to the existing Government, he and his family met a certain social ostracism. Even after days and months had passed, and matters social and commercial in the islands had once more become normal, this feeling of coolness still existed, and at no time were his relations with the people thoroughly cordial. His illness and death, however, which occurred during his term of office, and which were undoubtedly hastened by the weight of the mental burden he carried, served to smooth away much of the feeling of personal antagonism toward him.

To the same degree did the relations of the Hawaiian Minister at Washington, the Hon. Lorrin A. Thurston, become strained. In this matter the accounts of Minister Thurston and Secretary Gresham fail to agree. The latter charged that the Hawaiian Minister gave information regarding matters in Hawaii to the press, not having previously given the information in question to the Department of State. Mr. Thurston declared that the information thus made public did not cover matters of diplomatic concern, but were purely domestic occurrences, in which the Government of the United States was in no manner interested. He also asserted that deliberate social slights had been put upon him by the President and the Secretary of State, thus venting upon him personally the chagrin which they felt at the failure of their plans. Whatever may have been the cause of these strained relations, their outcome was a demand by President Cleveland for the recall of the Minister. The letter of demand miscarried in the mails, and was sent to Japan by an error of a postal clerk. In the meantime the fact that the Minister’s recall had been demanded became known at Washington. Minister Thurston thereupon withdrew from the legation and returned to Honolulu, placing his resignation in the hands of his Government before the arrival of the letter in which his recall had been demanded.

More information here and here and below.

We want to take this site to the next level but we need money to do that. Please contribute directly by signing up at https://www.patreon.com/history