The Rape of the Islands
August 27, 1898
Summary
The United States annexed the Republic of Hawaii, but the Planet along with many others do not agree with the government's methods.
Transcription
The Hawaiian Islands have been formally annexed to the United States, despite the protest of the native inhabitants thereof.
Although the outrage has been consummated the resolutions adopted and forwarded to President McKinley are interesting, and will tend to show to what extent we are drifting in the direction of selfish aggrandizement. Here is the text of the protest of the political societies of the island:
“Whereas, The Senate and House of Representatives of the United States have passed a joint resolution for the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands, and such a joint resolution has not been passed upon by the people of Hawaii, nor by their representatives in Legislature assembled; and,
“Whereas, by memorial the people of Hawaii have protested against the consummation of any invasion of their political rights, and have frequently appealed to the President, Congress, and the people of the United States to refrain from further participation in the wrongful annexation of Hawaii; and
“Whereas, the Declaration of American Independence expresses that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed; therefor be it
Protest against annexation
“Resolved. That as the representatives of a large body of native Hawaiians we solemnly protest against annexation in the manner proposed and without reference to, or obtaining the consent of the people of the Hawaiian Islands; and,
“Resolved. That a copy of these resolutions be forwarded to Sanford B Dole, President of the Republic of Hawaii, and to the agents representing William McKinley, President of the United States, at Honolulu.”
Could a stronger case be made out? Could the infamy of the deal be more strongly and convincingly expressed? We believe not. IN speaking on this same subject before the National Conference on the foreign policy of the United States, Mr. Moorefield Storey, of Boston, Mass., is quoted as saying:
“We have annexed Hawaii. A friendly state has been deprived of its independence. The governed were not asked whether they approved the Constitution or the rulers under which they lost their liberty, nor war the question whether they desired annexation ever submitted to them. Our flag in Hawaii floats over a subject people. But this disgraced of our principles will return to plague us sorely”
And again:
“We had said that the native population of Hawaii was not entitled to vote upon the vital question which we decided against their will, that by reason of their color, or race, or ignorance they may be governed without their consent. It will be far more difficult hereafter to insist that the colored voters of the south are entitled to right denied to the colored voters of Hawaii, so that equality of rights, which is the first of rights, is jeopardized within our own border, and problems which we thought the civil war had settled are reopened to fresh and dangerous controversy.”
He spoke truly and concluded as follows:
“No part of the territory taken from Spain should be kept by us, but our whole duty will be done if we give to the inhabitants in each case the opportunity to frame such government as they wish. Protect them until they can stand alone, and allow them as allied but independent states to learn the principles of self-government for themselves until at some future day, when conditions have made it safe, we may consider soberly the possibilities of closer union. So, shall their inevitable errors affect only themselves, and not endanger the great edifice of freedom which our fathers erected and which it is our duty to transmit unimpaired to our children.”
But what is the use of argument in a case like this? The office-seeker and the capitalist are impervious to reason. The jingle and the possession of the dollar alone move them.
“On with the dance!” Bring in more islands and gather up more booty! Who care for principle and who thinks of the hereafter? “On with the dance!”
Although the outrage has been consummated the resolutions adopted and forwarded to President McKinley are interesting, and will tend to show to what extent we are drifting in the direction of selfish aggrandizement. Here is the text of the protest of the political societies of the island:
“Whereas, The Senate and House of Representatives of the United States have passed a joint resolution for the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands, and such a joint resolution has not been passed upon by the people of Hawaii, nor by their representatives in Legislature assembled; and,
“Whereas, by memorial the people of Hawaii have protested against the consummation of any invasion of their political rights, and have frequently appealed to the President, Congress, and the people of the United States to refrain from further participation in the wrongful annexation of Hawaii; and
“Whereas, the Declaration of American Independence expresses that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed; therefor be it
Protest against annexation
“Resolved. That as the representatives of a large body of native Hawaiians we solemnly protest against annexation in the manner proposed and without reference to, or obtaining the consent of the people of the Hawaiian Islands; and,
“Resolved. That a copy of these resolutions be forwarded to Sanford B Dole, President of the Republic of Hawaii, and to the agents representing William McKinley, President of the United States, at Honolulu.”
Could a stronger case be made out? Could the infamy of the deal be more strongly and convincingly expressed? We believe not. IN speaking on this same subject before the National Conference on the foreign policy of the United States, Mr. Moorefield Storey, of Boston, Mass., is quoted as saying:
“We have annexed Hawaii. A friendly state has been deprived of its independence. The governed were not asked whether they approved the Constitution or the rulers under which they lost their liberty, nor war the question whether they desired annexation ever submitted to them. Our flag in Hawaii floats over a subject people. But this disgraced of our principles will return to plague us sorely”
And again:
“We had said that the native population of Hawaii was not entitled to vote upon the vital question which we decided against their will, that by reason of their color, or race, or ignorance they may be governed without their consent. It will be far more difficult hereafter to insist that the colored voters of the south are entitled to right denied to the colored voters of Hawaii, so that equality of rights, which is the first of rights, is jeopardized within our own border, and problems which we thought the civil war had settled are reopened to fresh and dangerous controversy.”
He spoke truly and concluded as follows:
“No part of the territory taken from Spain should be kept by us, but our whole duty will be done if we give to the inhabitants in each case the opportunity to frame such government as they wish. Protect them until they can stand alone, and allow them as allied but independent states to learn the principles of self-government for themselves until at some future day, when conditions have made it safe, we may consider soberly the possibilities of closer union. So, shall their inevitable errors affect only themselves, and not endanger the great edifice of freedom which our fathers erected and which it is our duty to transmit unimpaired to our children.”
But what is the use of argument in a case like this? The office-seeker and the capitalist are impervious to reason. The jingle and the possession of the dollar alone move them.
“On with the dance!” Bring in more islands and gather up more booty! Who care for principle and who thinks of the hereafter? “On with the dance!”
About this article
Source
Location on Page
Lower Left Quadrant
Topic
Contributed By
Cali Hughes
Citation
“The Rape of the Islands,” Black Virginia: The Richmond Planet, 1894-1909, accessed September 14, 2026, https://blackvirginia.richmond.edu/items/show/1598.