Foreign Relations of the United States, 1894, Appendix II, Affairs in Hawaii

No. 54.
Dr. Trousseau’s statements.

May 16, 1893.

Hon. J. H. Blount:

Sir: As you are not acquainted with me, I take the liberty of stating who I am. Born in Paris, France, in 1833, I am now a little over 60 years of age. I graduated in Paris as a physician in 1858. If you ask who is Trousseau, you will be probably answered, why, he is one of the Royalists.

In 1848 when 15½ [years] old I enlisted in the first battalion of the Mobile under the Republic and fought under the presidency of Cavaignac on the memorable days (three) of June, 1848, when the young citizens of Paris, three battalions, under command of McMahon, afterwards President of the Third Republic, defeated the insurgents.

In 1852, at the coup d’état, I was a medical student, was caught fighting against Napoleon III, narrowly escaped being court-martialed and shot or sent to New Caledonia.

I have been and am to this day a staunch believer in republican institutions, always fought against monarchy, so did my father; I am a great admirer of the United States Republic. Was I not a Frenchman, I would like to be an American. Indeed, if you decide on annexing the islands, in the straightforward, dignified way in which I know it will be done, I will probably be one of the first to swear the oath of allegiance to the United States.

This is, Mr. Blount, the kind of royalist I am.

From that point de vue I entreat you to consider my memorial, and if I have bored you, as I am afraid I have, please consider that all I am after is justice and fair play and you will bear up with me.

Yours, most respectfully,

G. Trousseau.

Sunday morning, May 21, 1893.

My dear Nordhoff:

Inclosed please find a rectified list of taxpayers.

Take for granted—

(1) That all Chinese and Japanese are against annexation.

(2) That no corporation can have an opinion, as no one knows in many cases who are the shareholders; in cases where it is known I have stated it.

(3) That no native estate, such as Lunalilo’s, Mrs. Bishop, Queen Emma Kalakaua, although they may be administered by annexationists, can be considered as such as far as the capital is concerned.

This list, therefore, is grossly misleading and insulting to the memory of the chiefs. Now we have all the natives who pay a large amount of taxes, some quite a sum.

The 35,000 Asiatics pay $5 apiece, say (the laborers alone) $185,000. Some own property; anyhow they pay licenses to the extent of over $50,000. You can, therefore, form your opinion of who really pays the expenses of the Government mostly since Spreckels has declared himself to you as against annexation.

Now about my memorial to Mr. Blount.

After inquiry yesterday I find that I had no right to give it to you to read just now. Therefore you will please not mention to anyone that you have read it, except to Mr. Blount, as you would put me to serious trouble indeed. It has for the present, anyhow, to be considered as of a strictly confidential nature, and therefore you will please do so, and not use any part of it.

When the time comes I will be glad to let you have it.

Very truly yours,

G. Trousseau.

You found out yesterday that I had not deceived you about Spreckels. The interview is a big thing for our side.

Honolulu, June 27, 1893.

Hon. J. H. Blount,
United States Commissioner:

Sir: In reference to your inquiries at the hotel this morning, I beg to state: That I was down town on January 16, 1893, a little before 5 p.m. There was a large gathering of foreigners about Fort and Merchant street corners. I inquired and was told that the United States forces would be landed at 5. Soon I saw C. L. Carter ride towards the wharf. I followed. Boats were landing troops, guns, and ambulance material; they were in undress campaign uniform. I saw C. L. Carter hand a letter to the commanding officer. The forces formed, marched up Fort street, then into Merchant street. I met Wideman; we jumped into a hack and drove at full speed to the palace, ahead of the forces. We met the Queen; she was composed; had already heard of the landing of the men, and said the United States minister means to support the committee of safety. Wideman and I said at once it must be the case; but it would be such an outrage that surely your Majesty will get justice from the United States Government. We stood on the veranda facing King street. Soon the forces advanced and formed in this manner:

We comforted the Queen; I left Widemann and others with her; drove hastily to the club. Met Wodehouse, Canavarro, and Vezzavona coming from Mr. Stevens’s. They told me they had just seen him about his reasons for landing the forces. Wodehouse said to me: “I told Stevens that the town was as quiet as a Quakers’ meeting. I asked him (Mr. Stevens) if the Queen’s Government had asked for the landing of the troops. He answered no. What is the object then? Protect law and order. But there is no breach of law and order. Answer: Ladies about town are very nervous and fear trouble. Why, said Wodehouse, ladies are driving about as usual with their children. No answer. We left, said Wodehouse.” What is your impression, I said. Why, said the three, no doubt but that Stevens means to help the committee of public safety. At the same time happened the incident with Mr. Giffard and an officer of the Boston, fully related in my memorial. That same evening after seeing Chairman Carter at the hospital, as related also in my memorial, say about 9 o’clock, I went by request to the Government building to meet the ministers and a number of persons friendly to the Queen’s Government.

After some discussion it was decided to make no resistance, as all of us understood that the United States forces who had then taken possession of Arion Hall were there to support any movement contemplated by the committee of safety. Therefore, I can assure you in perfect good faith that there was no doubt in anybody’s mind but that if resistance was shown the United States forces would take the part of the revolutionists. Chairman Carter’s statement was enough to prove that. The next day, January 17, only 25 men took possession of the Government house. When Mr. Cooper read the proclamation hardly that number were present. I was leaning on the fence of the Government building and saw the whole performance as related in my memorial.

The United States troops were under arms in Mr. Nacayama’s yard, guns in position ready to advance, some of the men drawn up under the veranda of Arion Hall, and some with, I think, one gun in the alley from Nacayama’s yard to Arion Hall.

This is, Mr. Blount, a succinct Report of what I know of the facts on January 16 and 17, 1893. For more details, I beg to refer you to the last part of my memorial.

The men who had been instructed to provide the necessary force for the taking of the Government building are Mr. P. Gardiner, an Englishman, and Mr. Harry Von Verthern, an American by birth, of German origin. They are willing to give you full information about their action, the assurance they had of the support of the United States forces, etc.

Respectfully submitted.

G. Trousseau.

Hon. J. H. Blount:

Sir: I beg to be excused if, unbidden, I take the liberty of addressing you. I understand that you wish to make a thorough investigation of our situation, and my position as a physician and old resident perhaps enables me to throw light on some obscure points. For over twenty years I am connected professionally with all political parties and the royal family.

I arrived here in 1872, under the reign of Kamehameha V. His prime minister, Dr. Hutchinson, was his physician as well. The King was not well, and shortly after I was called to see him. I soon found out that his condition was critical. I told his ministers that his days were counted, and shortly after he was himself acquainted with his own condition.

According to the constitution, which he had himself promulgated in 1864, he had the right to appoint his successor. Urged to do so, he demurred. His nearest kinsman was Lunalilo, a Kamehameha by his mother. But he was addicted to drink, and somewhat of a wag. The King hated him, the feeling being reciprocal. How well I remember the scenes at the old palace the day before the King’s death. Most of the chiefs were there, all of the pretend ants to the throne. The dying King was urged to make an appointment; Mrs. C. R. Bishop (Pauahi) urged her own claim. Friends of Kalakaua, of Queen Emma, widow of Kamehameha IV., urged their respective claims. Lunalilo kept silent, never went near the King’s room. At last, in my presence, the King said: “The throne belongs to Lunalilo; I will not appoint him, because I consider him unworthy of the position. The constitution, in case I make no nomination, provides for the election of the next King; let it be so.” He died the next morning. Thus ended the hereditary monarchy in the islands.

To this very important point I beg to call your special notice, as I will refer to it hereafter.

After a short interregnum, just long enough to get the Legislature together, Lunalilo was elected unanimously, and his election indorsed by public opinion, foreign as well as native. For the first time in many years our missionary friends and their sons and relatives mustered courage to recover their long-lost power. They used flattery, claimed recognition for their support towards the election, and Mr. E. O. Hall, father of the present W. Hall, had the formation of the new cabinet. I was the physician and friend of the King. I did not interfere in politics, and limited myself to my duties as such. I had a good deal of influence with him, but often, when I would be away, he would start drinking again in spite of me. Some good qualities in the man had strongly attached him to me.

One night, after a bout on board one of the American warships in port, he returned to Waikiki, went to sleep under his veranda, with thin underclothing, exposed to the strong trade wind. Within twenty-four hours pneumonia set in and for days his condition was serious. He recovered, however, but remained suffering from chronic pneumonia and pleurisy.

We decided on going to Kailua, Hawaii, a splendid health resort specially for lung troubles, and a favorite place of the Hawaiian chiefs. As soon as I decided to take the King off to Kailua, the chiefs and pretendants understood that his condition had become critical, and all insisted in following the King.

Mrs. Bishop (Pauahi), Queen Emma, now dead, Liliuokalani, the deposed Queen, her sister Likelike, now dead, Kapiolani, wife of Kalakaua, and others, came along with us, and none left the King’s side either by day or night. We lived in a very large native hut, and I dare say not less than 30 or 40 people slept there at night. I was the only white man there, and it was, I assure you, interesting to watch the chiefs, their rivalries and intrigues.

Lunalilo was constantly urged as Kamehameha V. had been, to appoint his successor; he had a great regard and perhaps a softer feeling toward Queen Emma, and would, I think, have married her, had it not been the influence of an old mistress, a half-white, who was also there with us. Mr. C. R. Bishop, Dominis, Kalakaua, the cabinet ministers, and the chief justice made flying visits to us, never remaining more than a day or two. All made me promise not to let the King die at Kailua, but to bring him back in time to Honolulu. The King often pointed out to me the maneuvers of the chiefs. He often said to me: “If I appoint any one it would be Emma, but I shall leave it to the people. I have been elected and the next King must be elected.” As he did not ask me to keep the secret, I would often say to the chiefs, to the cabinet ministers: “Please do not bother him; his mind is set; he will make no appointment.” But they mistrusted each other and kept at him. In the meantime he kept failing, and I saw and told him he was nearing his end. I also said that I had promised to bring him back to Honolulu. He said: “Why won’t they let me die here?” I answered: “You have appointed no successor; the ministers say that there are many things to settle, signatures to give, and so forth.”

Yielding reluctantly to my entreaties, we started, the whole crowd of us, and safely reached Honolulu, where the greatest ovation was made to the dying King. He lived one more week, during which I never left him either by day or night. The very same scenes that had taken place when Kamehameha V died were renewed with perhaps more insistence.

The premises—his father’s house—were thronged day and night by natives and foreigners. At last the King asked me to allow no one to bother him and no one in his room except his immediate attendants and Queen Emma. They made sure that Queen Emma would be appointed, but being appealed to constantly, I repeated, which I knew to be a fact, that he would make no appointment.

Nearly the whole of the natives were in favor of Queen Emma. The whole of the foreigners, with few exceptions, were in favor of Kalakaua—the whole, anyhow, of the so-called missionary party. The King died without appointing his successor.

The same interregnum took place. The legislature was called together and the election got through during the greatest excitement.

All of the native members were instructed to vote for Queen Emma by their constituents. But for the first time in Hawaiian history bribes were used by the missionary party and only 6 Hawaiian members stood fast for Queen Emma; the rest followed the lead of the missionary party and Kalakaua was elected. When the result was proclaimed from the balcony of the legislative hall, a mob of natives invaded the house to punish the native members for the treachery, and had it not been for the United States marines, commanded by Captain, now Admiral, Skerrett, the native members would have been killed. As it was, three or four fared rather badly. No violence was manifested toward any white member. And here I make another strong point, that it would be impossible to mention one single case of violence committed by a single native against a foreigner in the whole history of the islands, even when foreigners were absolutely at their mercy. Capt. Cook was the first and only victim, and he surely brought it upon himself.

Probably Kalakaua never would have reigned, and no one can possibly deny that his ascension to the throne was due to the foreigners’ influence and the quelling of the riot by the United States and English forces.

I wish you to make another point of this well-known fact, which could be vouched for to you by Admiral Skerrett himself. Is this an hereditary monarchy?

Kalakaua always thought, wrongly however, that my influence over Lunalilo had prevented the latter from appointing Queen Emma. Lunalilo’s mind was settled on the subject. Kalakaua showed the greatest friendship to me, and was, up to his death, quite confidential.

He soon found out that the missionary party who had put him in power wanted to get the upper hand and drive the natives to the wall, as has always been their wont.

Several times he appealed to me to form a cabinet, once coming all the way from Kona, Hawaii, all alone, but a native retainer, to my place 5,000 feet up Maunaloa, where I had retired for rest.

I returned with him to Honolulu, and not wishing to enter into politics, advised him to call on Mr. S. G. Wilder, now dead (brother of Mr. W. C. Wilder, one of the commissioners of the Provisional Government at Washington), to form a cabinet.

This was done in the middle of the night after our return from Hawaii. Wilder was a friend of the King, just to the natives, popular with all parties.

But although himself quite the reverse of a missionary, his family associations (he had married a daughter of Dr. Judd) prevented him from fully renouncing the party.

He was a clever man, but used his power mostly for his own benefit. However, it is under his ministry that an impulse was made in improvements that did benefit him personally, but benefited the country as well.

But the King still resented the missionary influence and at last discarded it by appointing Mr. Gibson at the head of a new cabinet. The missionary influence ceased from that time, and Mr. Gibson became a great favorite of the King and the natives. He was a man of undoubted ability, a thorough politician, but a dreamer.

Hawaii for the Hawaiians was his motto. The missionary party hated him, but until 1887 he matched them in every move. He pandered to every whim of the King, encouraged him to extravagant and useless schemes; hence his power in retaining office.

Nevertheless, no one can deny that it is under his detested rule, under the Kamajameha constitution, that the prosperity of the islands came to its height. The reciprocity treaty, the higher price of sugar, enriched everyone, and, although the missionary party kept active and anxious to regain power, the mass of the people did not otherwise object to Mr. Gibson’s rule and to the extravagance at the palace by which the whole retail trade of the islands was largely benefited.

The King was fond of display; had the military craze for show more than anything else. He organized several military companies. Our missionary friends did not lose their opportunity.

Selecting officers that neither the King nor Mr. Gibson suspected, they asked for the organization of the “Honolulu Rifles” and obtained it. Mr. V. V. Ashford was the chief of the organization.

The secret object was the overthrow of Mr. Gibson and of the King himself and the proclamation of a republic.

A secret league was formed; I was asked to join, but refused. The price of sugar went down gradually from $120 to $80 a ton. This created some discontent and helped to made successful, in a certain degree, the revolution of 1887.

The move was an overt act of treason. The “Honolulu Rifles” had sworn allegiance to the King; had received from him presents, favors, and their flag. He had encouraged and helped them in every possible way, was proud of their appearance, and reviewed them often himself. When I was asked to join the league and refused I knew what was coming; I knew that a constitution establishing a republic was prepared. In refusing I had assured the leaders that I would not betray them in giving their names, but that I was opposed to the movement, to the overthrow of the King in particular, and that I would use whatever influence I might have in bringing about a compromise.

I advised the King to dismiss Mr. Gibson and appoint a ministry more in accord with public opinion, and warned him that in not doing so he was taking great risks. He thanked me but assured me that he was prepared; that he would make no attack, but if attacked would defend himself. I once more asked him to dismiss Gibson but failed to persuade him. In the meantime the fighting enthusiasm of the “Honolulu Rifles” cooled down considerably when they heard from their spies and myself that they would get a rather hot reception at the palace.

I then volunteered to bring about a compromise and was authorized to ask the King to sign a new constitution. I advised him to yield, representing to him that personal government was a thing of the past; that if he resisted, although I did not doubt but he was able to do so, there necessarily would be bloodshed between natives and foreigners, and that he risked interference from the United States. He told me that he would sign a new constitution if presented to him. I so reported to the leaders. The constitution was hurriedly recopied, substituting monarchy for republic, and the King signed it, and Mr. Thurston was intrusted with the formation of the new cabinet.

In the meantime, although I admit that the power of the King required to be curtailed, the reading of the enactments of the Legislature under this detested administration will convince you that no measure was ever neglected or opposed that possibly could assist or forward the interest of the foreign residents. The motto, “Hawaii for the Hawaiians” never infringed on our rights except in the appointment to Government offices.

In fact the Hawaiian statute book will show from the earliest period to this very time that always due regard has been paid to the prosperty of the white settler, and that every care had been taken to secure their comfort and happiness. I do not hesitate to say that the laws of this little country, although enacted with a constant majority of native representatives, can compare favorably with those of any other civilized country. From 1887 has begun the real period of unrest.

The establishment of a republic with the intention of immediate annexation to the United States was the object of the revolution. Ever since the missionary party, encouraged more especially by the attitude of Mr. Stevens, has been conspiring against the monarchy.

Coming now to more recent events, I will consider them with absolute impartiability.

The Legislature of 1892 was protracted and agitated by constant changes of cabinet. However, two measures only were passed that may be considered as harmful. I refer to the opium license bill and the lottery bill. All other measures demanded by the foreign residents as necessary to their welfare were passed without opposition by the native members. The missionary party alone used bribes to recover power with the well-known object of using it to do what they succeeded only in doing by revolution and treachery on January 16 last. Hence the resistance of the Queen and her friends to let them gain and retain their power.

The opium bill was carried not only by the natives, but by a majority of the whole of the members.

When I arrived in the country, opium was licensed. Any one acquainted as I am with the Chinese will know that the license is the best arid the only way to stop smuggling. Several foreign citizens, now strong supporters of the Provisional Government and strong annexationists, whose names are in every body’s mouth, have been more or less connected with opium smuggling, and although the Provisional Government itself had nothing to do with it, I am sure their chartered vessel, the Claudine, on which the commissioners went after the revolution, although manned by none but picked supporters of the Provisional Government and none but white men, returned chockful of opium.

Anyhow, as I said before, the opium bill was supported by some of the best white members, strong annexationists. I now come to the lottery bill. I believe you have seen the petition. I have seen it, as it was brought to me to sign, which I declined to do. You will notice that it was signed by nearly every shopkeeper in Honolulu. The missionaries proper did not sign it.

I, for one, as a Frenchman, had no particular dislike to the bill, accustomed as we are in Europe to the working of it. Portugal, Spain, Italy, Austria, Prussia, and other continental nations have state lotteries. France has no state lottery, but any one for a charitable or national purpose can be authorized by the Government to draw a lottery.

The City of Paris, the Credit Foncier, have drawings of their bonds every three months. Furthermore, the Louisiana lottery is still in existence in the United States and $1,000 worth of its tickets are sold here monthly by the employés of some of our best mercantile firms. The natives were all in favor of it. Chinese lotteries are in full swing every day in Honolulu, and are patronized by foreigners as well as natives. Why in presence of a petition in favor of the bill should the Queen, who had vetoed no bill during the session, veto this particular bill?

Now, the new constitution that the Queen wanted to promulgate is supposed to have precipitated the crisis. The constitution of 1887 in partially disfranchising the natives and giving a vote to all foreigners, without even a residence clause, has always been distasteful to them. This you will readily understand. They wanted the old Kamehameha constitution back, the one indeed under which everyone in the islands except the natives themselves became rich and prospered.

When it was abrogated in 1887, taxation, even with the acknowledged extravagance of Mr. Gibson’s regime, was only ¾ of 1 per cent on the value of real estate.

In the year 1887 only it had to be raised to 1 per cent—a low enough rate you will admit. But even these low rates never have been paid, mostly by the planters, who always managed to have their friends appointed as tax assessors, and I have known plantations which only paid the rate on their income, or dividends, instead of on their capital.

Even then another fraud has been constantly committed with the tacit consent of even Mr. Gibson’s administration. It consisted in this: Declarations of value have to be made on July 1, of each year; during the last part of June all the available vessels in port would be loaded and cleared at the custom-house before the evening of the 30th of June. Thousands of tons yearly escape taxation this way.

Returning to the new constitution, the queen was constantly pestered by the native leaders to promulgate a new one.

Her advisers, even Mr. Wilson, who, as you probably heard, had a great deal of influence with the Queen, entreated her to give up the idea. Her excuse was in the constant verbal and written demands of her people, who as a whole have no objection to personal government as long as it is exercised by their own chiefs. The prime and perhaps only real objection to the constitution of 1887 on the part of the natives is that it was exacted from the King by an armed force and in a revolutionary manner.

However, granting that the queen was wrong in asking her ministers (she did nothing, more) to help her in proclaiming the new constitution, she had abandoned the idea and made, I believe, a sufficient public retraction.

No, Mr. Blount, these were not the causes of the revolution.

The Missionary party, backed by Mr. Stevens and Capt. Wiltse, made the revolution to regain lost power.

They were at the time backed by the planters and business men on account of the low price in sugar and the McKinley bill.

Almost daily, to my personal knowledge, meetings were held at Mr. Stevens’ house in which the possibilities of a peaceful revolution with the prospects of annexation were discussed. Prominent at these meetings were the Chief Justice, Mr. Dole, Mr. Thurston, Mr. Hartwell, Charles Carter, and others, also Capt. Wiltse.

The latter, for the last three months before the revolution a guest of the Pacific Club, of which I am a member, became so offensive that I and others took issue and expressed it to him and often asked him: “Well, captain, when are you going to hoist the American flag?” Fully six months before the revolution Mr. Stevens asked Mr. George d’Anglade, French commissioner, now consul for France in New Orleans, and my friend Canavarro, the Portuguese chargé d’affaires, to dinner. They went and found the only guests besides themselves Mr. Thurston and Mr. Hartwell. I met them the next day and they expressed their thorough disgust at Mr. Stevens’ action.

They soon found after the first course the annexation question was slyly brought about and felt that they were asked there to commit themselves. They kept on their guard and as soon as dinner was over withdrew and left Mr. Stevens and his two other guests.

I now come to the condition of affairs on January 16, the day the forces were landed.

After the two meetings the town was as quiet as ever it had been. The Queen had withdrawn the constitution.

The natives “Hui Kalaiaiaina” had peacefully submitted. There was no breach of law and order. Being down town, I noticed some excitement in Merchant street by the post-office and corners of Fort street. I inquired the cause of it: “The United States forces will land in a short while,” I was told. A few minutes after, Charles Carter rode down in a hack, I followed and saw him at the foot of Fort street waiting for the landing of the troops. He received the commanding officer, handed him a letter, and showed him where to go. A large crowd gathered. I went back, met Widemann, and we drove hastily to the palace.

Soon the forces with Gatling guns, etc., marched up and formed in the space between the palace, Kawaiaho church, and the Government building, and halted there under arms. After comforting the Queen, telling her that the United States could not possibly sustain Mr. Stevens’s action, I left at once to find out more about the trouble. I drove hastily to the club, saw Wodehouse, Nanavarro, and Vizzavona in a hack. They alighted to speak to me. As we met, Mr. Giffard, of Irwin & Co. (Spreckels) joined us.

They said: “We just came from Stevens to find out about the landing of the forces. We asked him at whose request they landed.” He said, “Ladies about town are very nervous and feared trouble” “Why,” said I (Wodehouse speaking), “the town, Mr. Stevens, is perfectly quiet, as quiet as a Quaker’s meeting.” Continuing: “Were you asked by the Queen’s Government to land the troops?” “No.” “What is your object?” “Protect law and order.” “Why,” said Wodehouse, “there is no breach of law and order.” No answer. The Frenchman, Vizzavona, said:

“But why are the forces occupying an armed position on the principal square of the town commanding the palace and the Government building?” No answer. “We left” said Wodehouse “and are satisfied that Stevens means to assist a movement from the committee of safety.” The five of us were standing on the sidewalk, corner of Beretania street and Alakea close to the club. All at once rides up an officer from the Boston and asks to speak to Mr. Giffard. After a short conversation with the officer, Giffard returned to us and said, “What do think they want?” Why the use of the Music Hall as quarters for the forces. I have refused.” We went to the club. Within ten minutes the officer returned with a written request to Mr. Giffard for the use of the Music Hall.

The request was from Mr. Stevens himself. Giffard answered “I can not grant the request. The Music Hall belongs to my principal, Mr. Irwin, who is away. And again the Music Hall commands the Government building and the palace. I do not feel justified in giving the United States forces such a commanding position, entrenched at that, as long as I am satisfied that the forces are landed against the expressed protest of the foreign representatives and of the Queen’s Government.” (We knew from the cabinet members that they had protested.) This ended the Music Hall business.

Later on Mr. Stevens also in writing requested the use of Arion Hall, close by, and it was granted for one night only. Instead of leaving on the morning as agreed upon, notwithstanding a protest from Mr. Nacayama and Mr. Waller, the lessees of the premises, the troops held the premises until after the event of January 17. Is it not patent that Mr. Stevens and Capt. Wiltse meant them to support the movement which took place next day at 3 p.m.?

That same evening, January 16, at about 8 o’clock, I met Charles Carter at the hospital. I am his family physician. He asked me to go and see his wife, who was pregnant—close to her confinement—and felt very nervous on account of the part he, Charles Carter, was taking in the movement. He had been to my house and heard that I was at the hospital. I said I would go at once. I asked, “What are you about anyhow?” He said that they had asked Stevens to land the troops; that he would support them; that they were going to depose the Queen, and never stop short of annexation at any cost. I represented to him that I doubted very much if the United States would sustain Stevens. He said, “It is all arranged beforehand, and we can carry our point with Foster and Harrison before the new administration comes in.”

Knowing poor Charley, as I do, from his boyhood (and a big over-fat boy he is still), 1 did not think it worth my while to argue with him. However, I said, “The Queen will do what is right if asked to do so.” He said, “We will not give her the chance. We will depose her. Annexation is the word.”

The next morning, a patient of mine, P. Gardiner by name, an Englishman, called. He was under treatment. He said, “I am in a hurry to-day” (the office being pretty full); “try not to keep me waiting.” This was about 10 a.m. He added, “To-day (January 17th) we depose the Queen. I have to be on hand any time after 12 o’clock. The call will be one tap of the bell. ‘Tower Bell.’” Knowing my man well as one of the unemployed, and knowing that his sympathies were the other way, I said, “What do you get for that job?” “One hundred dollars cash, $2.50 a day and board afterwards, and the promise of a billet of not less than $100 a month.” “Who made you the promise?” “Thurston.” The man is still connected with the revolutionists, and is willing to make the statement to Mr. Blount himself.

I said “Do you mean fight?” Answer: “Why, the United States forces will support us.” After 12 o’clock I kept on the lookout for that one tap of the bell. At 2 p.m. my assistant, whom I had sent to pay a bill to E. O. Hall & Son, rushed in and said, “John Good just came to Hall’s to get arms, got them into his express wagon; a policeman went to stop the wagon and Good shot him in the breast.”

They drove up King street, supposed to go to the armory on Beretania street. I started on foot to the armory, which is close to my office. Saw a few men there, amongst them the man Gardiner, and went to the club, still watching for that one tap of the bell. I got to the club at 2:15 p.m., met there several people, amongst them C. A. Brown, who had been prominent in the 1887 revolution, and who, I knew by Charles Carter and others, to be one of the committee of public safety. He had no arms and wore a morning suit.

I said: “Well, Brown, you are going to depose the Queen at the stroke of the bell.” He said: “How do you know?” I answered “Never mind.” I added “I understood that you will be supported by Stevens.” He said “Well you have got it pretty straight. That’s just how it is.” “You are waiting for the tap of the bell,” said I. (The tower is close to the club.) He said, “Yes.”

At half past 2 o’clock I heard the one tap. He (Brown) started at a good pace. I followed. He went into the Government building and I stopped outside the fence in the street leading from King to Queen street. My glance could not count more than 20 people about, outside of the Boston men who were under arms in Mr. Nacayama’s yard, in the lane between the said yard and Arion Hall and under the veranda of Arion Hall.

Gatling guns were drawn up in Nacayama’s yard.

A few minutes before 3 p.m. an unknown person—Mr. Cooper, I heard since, a perfect stranger—now judge—read a proclamation of which I only heard a part.

I went to the barracks. There were the Hawaiian troops, one hundred or so in number, ready for action if ordered out.

I went to the station house, and saw a number of foreigners rushing in and putting themselves at the disposal of the marshal. Before an hour had elapsed I found out that Mr. Stevens had already recognized the Provisional Government and that the Queen had ordered, under protest, the surrender of the barracks and station house to avoid bloodshed. I can assure you, Mr. Blount, that the Queen’s Government was perfectly competent to take care of the situation; that the force in the Government building had no arms nor ammunition to speak of, and that the whole game was one of bluff, a surprise, a coup de main, as we call it in French. Why? The clerks in the Government building were at their desks; the routine of the various departments was going on. A handful of filibusters, backed by Mr. Stevens and Captain Wiltse, did the job and the Queen and her friends, trusting to redress from the United States, yielded to avoid bloodshed, and with the full knowledge that if resistance was shown the United States forces would support the rebels.

I am satisfied that by this time you have formed a correct opinion of all facts, and perhaps you will find this long memorial rather tedious.

I will now try to conclude and spare your patience. It will be presumptuous for anyone, Provisional Government, royalists, native, and so forth, to try to advise the United States about ourselves.

The question, therefore, simplifies itself. If President Cleveland and yourself have made up your minds about the necessity of annexing the islands, very well; we have nothing more to say, and no one better than yourself, Mr. Blount, can bring it about.

You must be well aware by this time that the Provisional Government is not a popular government. If you wish to go to the trouble, procure the roll of the annexation club and the very complete registry of voters made only a couple of years ago. A short comparison will show you the comparative number of voters on the annexation roll. After that, take into consideration that every business firm connected with the movement has compelled their employés under threat of dismissal to sign the roll and you can form a pretty correct opinion of how the Provisional Government stands.

Therefore, satisfied that the Provisional Government is only a revolutionary government put in power by the United States forces and without any support from the majority of the population, the United States can refuse to treat the question of annexation with the Provisional Government.

Let the United States Government put things back where Mr. Stevens found them on January 17; restore the queen; let her call her Legislature together and state to them, by special message, that in presence of the necessity in which the United States are placed to secure the possession of the Hawaiian Islands, she herself is prepared to abdicate in favor of Grover Cleveland, President of the United States, and expects the representatives of the people to make no opposition to the measure, and at once ratify a treaty of cession as agreed upon between yourself and herself.

Being done in that manner you will find little opposition, and all of us will assist in bringing the matter to a safe and peaceable solution.

If, on the other hand, the United States only wish to secure supremacy and absolute control of the islands without annexation, the same course can be safely followed.

Restore the Queen and make with her, in accord with the Legislature, a cast iron treaty to suit yourselves.

Take for instance the treaty between France and Tunis or England and Egypt; they are not exactly a protectorate, as the flags of the two countries do not fly either in Tunis or Egypt, but in both countries the native rulers and legislatures are under the complete and absolute control of the European powers, and from my reading both systems work well, notwithstanding the jealously of France in Egypt and of Italy in Tunis.

Here, where no other power means to interfere, I think such a system would answer. However, you are the best judges. But whatever you wish you can get with the almost unanimous consent of this small nation, when, on the contrary, if you treat with the Provisional Government the large majority will feel that a great wrong has been committed towards a people who have always been friendly to the United States, are so now, and only wish to be allowed to attend to their affairs themselves.

A third solution is a protectorate, same as we (the French) had in Tahiti, until the ruling chiefs became extinct. The French flag was raised, but the Pomares enjoyed the use of the palace, a pension from the French Republic, and a kind of state befitting to the ancient owners of the land.

But I understand that such a protectorate would not be agreeable to the United States statesmen.

Further back I made a string point of the fact that this was no more on hereditary monarchy. These people are truly the elect of their subjects, Kalakaua by direct vote, and Liliuokalani by his appointing her as his successor under, not only the Kamehameha constitution, but under the constitution 1887 made by the revolutionists themselves which confirmed his appointment. During the King’s absence to the coast, when he died, these very people were in power, and Liliuokalani was by them accepted as regent.

A few words now about the capital (American) invested in this country.

I do not hesitate to say that Mr. Spreckels represents the only really American capital invested here.

The loan is English money, so are the tramways, and a large number of the plantations, principally in Kohala, on the island of Hawaii.

The whole of Mr. Bishop’s capital is Hawaiian. Mr. Bishop came here as a poor clerk, married Pauahi, and out of the Kanaka country made what he owns. He never lived in a house built by himself or owned by himself until his wife died, leaving him all. Not only that, but Mr. Bishop has invested very large sums in the States all out of this country’s resources.

Mr. Damon is also a creature of Mrs. Pauahi Bishop.

Mr. James Campbell came here as a journeyman carpenter.

The Ii estate—C. A. Brown’s wife is an Ii.

The Robinsons estate, the Lunalilo estate, the Bishop estate, the Kalakaua estate, and Hawaiian capital represents a very large portion of the tax-paying capital, and are not represented in the annexation party. Take now the taxes paid by the Chinese and the Japanese, and if you will go to the trouble of consulting the tax assessors’ books you will find that the annexation club does not represent the wealth and influence of the country.

None of the American firms or planters ever brought a cent from the United States here. In dividends and investments they have exported millions of dollars.

As far as the missionaries proper are concerned, they brought exactly nothing. They were housed and fed by the natives, their children tended for them, and their churches built for them free of expense. They were given land by the people, who served them, nursed them, cooked for them, did all the most menial work without compensation, drew them about in hand carts to church and to their social entertainments, and paid them besides a tax of 10 cents a week per head for each adult all through the districts over which they had spiritual control. When I lived in Hawaii, Mr. Bond, a missionary and wealthy planter, still collected from the natives of his district the weekly 10 cents himself.

The revolution was made by Messrs. Dole, Thurston, W. O. Smith, C. L. Carter, Judd, etc., all sons of missionaries, who owe the whole of their social and pecuniary position to the natives.

In their respective professions as lawyers they never were able to make a living.

Dole, Thurston, and Smith’s clearest income has been as trustees of various native estates, mentioned before. Of course all have interests in plantations, outside, I think, of Dole and Thurston. These people on the whole are good enough people, honest, I dare say on any subject in which their ambition or their interest is not directly connected. But they are all suffering from a very serious complaint, a swelled head, incurable I am afraid. But I must not abuse your patience any longer, and will subscribe myself,

Yours, respectfully,

G. Trousseau.

Since writing the above memorial I have had communication of a pamphlet shortly to be published by Mr. Stevens. I will not discuss the very lame apology he gives for his interference nor the absolutely false statements in which he indulges. These I believe sufficiently elucidated by your personal information. But his slanderous attacks on the private character of the Queen I will not leave unchallenged.

In my memorial I referred to the undoubted influence Charles B. Wilson had over the Queen. I will now explain that influence. Wilson persuaded the Queen, I believe, that she was safe in his hands. He is a determined man, has got plenty of personal courage, and often told the Queen that, had he been marshal of the Kingdom in 1887, the King never would have been compelled by the force of arms to sign the constitution; he would have nipped the conspiracy in the bud. Right or wrong, the Queen believed him, hence his influence.

I have known the Queen intimately for over twenty years. When I arrived here she had not been married long, and her husband, John O. Dominis, an American, and an intimate friend of mine, was fondly beloved by her. John Dominis’s character was unimpeachable—ask any one who knew him—Mr. C. R. Bishop, Mr. W. F. Allen, and others. I am now speaking from a physician’s point of view. John was, to use a euphemism, rather irregular as a husband—as many husbands in my experience are. He was fond of society, sometimes took more liquor than was good for him, and occasionally (although he never kept a regular mistress) had some love adventures. In this small community they were reported to his wife, and I can vouch to how she suffered by it. She was exceedingly fond and jealous of him. But, like most unfaithful husbands, he would not have for one moment shut his eyes on even any sign of unfaithfulness on the part of his wife. As long as he was alive, any one slandering his wife would have, I assure you, been severely punished. If there has been any failing in the Queen’s faithfulness to her husband it never has been known, and as far as Wilson is concerned, it is on the part of Mr. Stevens an unmitigated lie. Did I know that Mr. Stevens would resent it as we do in my country I would to day go and give him the lie. But he would probably have me arrested and convicted, and, busy as lam with my arduous profession, I can’t afford it.

Mr. Wilson has a half-white wife, an intimate friend of the Queen. Although not a young woman, she is still attractive, and has been one of the prettiest half-white women in Honolulu. I have also been her physician and known her well. She is, and always has been, of a jealous disposition, and notwithstanding Mr. Stevens’ abominable statement, would never countenance an intimacy between her husband and any other woman, even were she the Queen. She is now more attractive than the Queen is or ever has been.

That Mr. Stevens believes these stories I strongly doubt. They suit his purpose. If he is not wholly responsible for them, he has accepted them, without control, from Sereno Bishop, and others who know better.

The whole matter, Mr. Blount, is an outrage that makes an honest man’s blood boil.

G. Trousseau.

May 16, 1893.