Mr. Blount to Mr. Gresham.
Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands, May 24, 1893.
Sir: The letters of Mr. Nordhoff to the New York Herald, on the situation of affairs in the Hawaiian Islands, have produced intense resentment in the minds of American residents and of white annexationists generally here.
On the 21st instant Dr. J. C. McGrew, who claims to be an American citizen, and who is a leading member of the Annexation Club, and the editor in chief of the Hawaiian Star, which belongs to the Annexation Club and is a quasi official organ of the Government, reported to Admiral Skerrett that there had been quite an excitement all day long amongst persons who were offended by Mr. Nordhoff’s letters, and that he had scarcely been able to restrain them from insulting Mr. Nordhoff by applying to him a coat of tar and feathers.
I immediately addressed a note to Mr. Dole, a copy of which I inclose herewith. (Inclosure No. 1.)
Later in the day Dr. McGrew informed Admiral Skerrett that there would be no effort to tar and feather Mr. Nordhoff, but that proceedings would be taken the next day in court against him.
The following day brought no answer from President Dole to my communication.
In the afternoon of the 22d instant, a paper was served upon Mr. Nordhoff—a copy of which I inclose.
The assertion of a power under the color of law to hold Mr. Nordhoff responsible for the publication of his letters in the New York Herald being regarded as without warrant of authority and in violation of his rights as an American citizen, I determined immediately to communicate to the Government a denial of their right to proceed against him on account of said publication.
Desiring to avoid any semblance of too great readiness to enter into a controversy with the Hawaiian Government over this matter, I went to see President Dole, and called attention to the action of the attorney general and informed him that the Government of the United States would not submit to the exercise of such a prerogative on the part of the Hawaiian Government; that I deemed it proper to hold a conversation with him, hoping to avoid thereby any official correspondence which might produce acerbity or the slightest estrangement. He replied that he was very much obliged to me for having taken such a course, and that the question raised would be examined and the conclusions reached communicated to me.
He then referred to my letter, saying that he would have answered it, but supposed that it was intended simply to give him notice of the facts stated. I replied that I regretted he had not seen fit to give me any information concerning the matter in writing in order that the same might be forwarded, to the Government of the United States; that I hoped the additional subject of controversy, to which I invited his attention, would be adjusted in a manner consistent with the honor of the United States, and so speedily that I might be able to communicate this also to the home Government. After some conversation on this subject he informed me that the advisory council had requested Mr. Nordhoff to come before it, and asked me if I thought he would come, as it was only a request. To this I answered, “I presume not. Whatever information Mr. Nordhoff may have obtained carried with it an obligation of privacy, which I do not believe he would violate.”
[Page 423]All this occurred on the street, and as we were about to part, I said to him that I should call on Mr. Nordhoff, and let him know the status of the affair; that I felt it my duty to give him such assurances as would conduce to his sense of security. To this he responded: “I have taken precautions against any violence being done to him, although I do not think he is in any danger.”
I immediately sent to Mr. Nordhoff’s house and was at first prevented from entering the yard by two policemen. I am persuaded, however, that this was an unintentional error on their part and not in pursuance of their instructions.
In conversation with Mr. Nordhoff he told me he had been summoned before the advisory council. On reaching home I found the document, a copy of which I inclose herewith (No. 3).
It had very little the appearance to my mind of a request. On the 23d I had Mr. Nordhoff come to the legation headquarters at 9 o’clock, and requested him to remain there until I should return from the Government building where I was about to proceed to make formal announcement of my appointment as envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary.
I do not deem it necessary to report the speech of myself or President Dole, but simply to say that they contained those manifestations of friendship usually occurring on such occasions between-friendly powers.
After this ceremony was over President Dole expressed a desire to speak with me on the subject of the legal proceedings instituted by the attorney-general against Mr. Nordhoff, and likewise the action of the advisory council and my verbal complaint in relation thereto. He began by desiring an appointment with me sometime during the day in order to communicate with me what had occurred in the matter of the consideration of the subject by the law officers of the Government. I said that I hoped it would be disposed of as promptly as possible; and that I had foreborne any written communication on the subject in the interest of good will between the two countries; that unless the matter was disposed of speedily I must address him a communication.
He asked me if Mr. Nordhoff would go before the council and make an apology? To this I responded that I did not think he would; that I could not advise him to such a course; that after denunciation by the “Star,” the Annexation Club organ, threats of insult by tarring and feathering, proceedings instituted by the attorney-general in the local courts, and the action of the advisory council, such an apology would have the appearance of compulsion, to which I was not willing to see an American citizen subjected.
At this hoar (10:40) I am awaiting a communication from the Government. To avoid any additional complications I have advised Mr. Nordhoff to remain at the legation.
At 2:10 p.m. a communication was received from President Dole, through his secretary, a copy of which I inclose herewith (No. 4). Whereupon Mr. Nordhoff left the legation for his residence.
At 4:30 p.m. of the same day, the 23d instant, not hearing anything from President Dole, I sent my secretary, Mr. Mills, to inquire whether he would call during the day, and if so, at what time? He sent me a verbal message by Mr. Mills to the effect that he was not under the impression that he was to have any further conversation with me, having had one at the Government building. Of course this was a misunderstanding between us. He further stated that the advisory council had referred the subject to the attorney-general, to inquire [Page 424] whether any civil or criminal proceedings would be taken against Mr. Nordhoff.
Thereupon I determined to forward to him a letter (a copy of which I inclose, No. 5), which I had written on yesterday afternoon, but had withheld it, hoping for a speedy adjustment of the difference without its being placed in writing.
I recognize the obligation of an American citizen residing in a foreign country to obey its laws.
It has appeared to me that the doctrine laid down by Mr. Bayard in the case of A. K. Cutting, September 9, 1885, is applicable to the pending case. If this be true then the issue may as rightfully be made before the consideration of the cause as subsequent thereto.
Yesterday afternoon the Hon. John L. Stevens called to see me. He was exceedingly bitter against Mr. Nordhoff—charging him with treasonable conduct and displaying the most eager interest in the matter of the action of the Hawaiian Government against him. Amongst other things he alleged that Mr. Nordhoff had been conspiring with the royalists to overthrow the Provisional Government, and that the Government had the evidence against him in black and white. I asked him how this came to his knowledge! He replied, “Well, I have it, anyhow; and they ought to have it.”
I very much fear that his relations to the people here, and his bitter feeling against Mr. Nordhoff, has contributed to produce an abnormal excitement against the latter.
I believe the situation was such as made it necessary for me to promptly act in the manner related.
The objectionable correspondence heretofore referred to was published in the Daily Bulletin. So far as I know it is not claimed by the authorities here that Mr. Nordhoff had anything to do with its publication.
I inclose herewith a copy of a communication from him (No. 6).
I expect that action will be taken requiring Mr. Nordhoff to leave the country. Should this occur I shall not deem it my duty to make objection.
I am, etc.,
Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States.