No. 15.
Interview with J. O. Carter,
Honolulu, May 13, 1893.
Mr. Blount. Are you a brother of the Mr. Carter who was at one time minister to the United States?
A. I am.
Q. What business are you engaged in?
A. I am a sugar factor and commission merchant.
Q. I see in the correspondence between the American minister at this point and the State Department, during Mr. Harrison’s administration, reference to the relations between the ex-Queen and Mr. Wilson, the ex-marshal. Please tell me what you know of the character of the Queen.
A. So far as I know I have always found her to be a gentlewoman, very kindly and generous, and I do not know anything against her, except what parties have circulated in Honolulu.
Q. Do you give any credit to these stories?
A. No; knowing this community as well as I do, I do not credit them.
Q. In what way do you mean?
A. There is more loose talk about men and women in this town than any place I have ever seen in my life. I never knew such a place for loose talk.
Q. Was she invited to private houses to entertainments by Americans and Europeans?
A. She was.
Q. Did the ladies of these nationalities tesort freely to the palace and manifest respect for her?
A. They did to my certain knowledge.
Q. To any considerable extent?
A. It was limited only by her.
Q. She was welcome at any house?
A. I never knew anything against her being invited. She was most certainly welcome.
Q. What is the foundation of these rumors against her character?
A. I suppose the fact that Wilson and his wife resided in that bungalow and resided in the cottage at Washington Place when she was there.
Q. Did they live in the house with her?
A. Not to my knowledge. I understand that Wilson and his wife [Page 736] lived in the bungalow at the palace and in the cottage at Washington Place.
Q. The bungalow was 30 or 40 yards from the palace?
A. Certainly; all of that.
Q. Did Mr. Wilson and his wife live in that bungalow?
A. I understand so. 1 never called on them.
Q. What were the relations between the Queen and Mrs. Wilson?
A. I think she very largely brought Mrs. Wilson up. Mrs. Wilson was the daughter of an American, John S. Townsend. He deserted his wife and family, and the Queen showed her kindness to the girl. But that was before she was Queen; before she was heir apparent. Natives have a way of bringing up children in that way.
Q. She took this Mrs. Wilson up at about what age?
A. I can not say; but at quite an early age. There are two kinds of children among the natives—Keikehanai and Keikehanau. The lat ter is a child of the body the former an adopted child.
Q. Has she (Liliuokalani) ever had a child?
A. She never had any children.
Q. What do you know of Mr. Wilson?
A. I know that he is reputed to be half Tahitian; that he was a blacksmith and that he was marshal of the Kingdom. Q. His father was of what nationality?
A. I do not really know.
Q. Does he seem to be about the same type of person as the half-castes are?
A. Just about.
Q. His associations generally are with those people?
A. Yes.
Q. Did he come here as a child?
A. That I can not tell you.
Q. What reason did the Queen have for appointing this person to the office of marshal and for having him to live in the palace grounds when she was at that place and in the cottage when she was at Washington Place?
A. She believed thoroughly in his loyalty, He has the reputation of being courageous, and she believed that he would protect her against persons who were disposed against her.
Q. Protect her in what sense? Was she apprehensive of any assault?
A. I think she has been from all that I could gather.
Q. Of what?
A. Of this party of revolutionists.
Q. Do you mean that she has not felt sure but what some movement would be made looking to her dethronement?
A. Whether it was that or overturning of the State I can not say.
Q. And you think that was the reason, in connection with Wilson’s loyalty to her and his courage, that she persisted in holding him in office?
A. I can not think of any other reason.
Q. What was the reason of the desire on the part of the opposition or Reform party to get Wilson out of that place? What sort of officer did he make?
A. He was in charge of the police. He was a very good marshal, and the proof of that is that when the Reform party came into power they did not put him out.
Q. In 1887?
A. I do not mean that I mean lately—in the Legislature they did [Page 737] not put him out. Mr. Neumann invited them to come before him and a committee and make their complaint about Mr. Wilson; said that he wouldlisten to them, and if they gave sufficient reason why he should be deposed they should do it. Neumann told me so himself.
Q. What reason do you suppose they had for the attacks on Wilson?
A. He was in their way.
Q. In their way in what thing? Do you imagine that there was any annexation movement in the minds of the Reform party?
A. Individuals in the party were always pronounced annexationists. Hartwell was; Mr. Gren was; Mr. Thurston—I won’t say that of Thurston. The only insight I got as to his feelings was that he remarked to me one day that he believed in bringing things to a smash.
Q. How long ago was that?
A. During the session of the Legislature. It was at a meeting of the company we were in. He said, “I believe in bringing things to a smash and then we will rebuild.”
Q. What is your interpretation of all that turning out of cabinets and putting in of cabinets? Did it illustrate that smashing-up policy?
A. Thurston was a ringleader in all that work and I believe it was to that end.
Q. How in point of intelligence did the Wilcox cabinet compare with the Macfarlane cabinet, take them as a whole?
A. In point of intelligence there was not much difference. In the matter of having the confidence of men of wealth the Jones-Wilcox cabinet was undoubtedly the superior.
Q. What is the character of Mr. Samuel Parker as to truthfulness?
A. I have never heard it questioned. He is a frank, open sort of person, and such persons are not liars as a rule.
Q. Does he circulate in the best society in Honolulu, he and his family?
A. Yes, they can circulate wherever they want to.
Q. He and his wife are both half-castes?
A. They are.
Q. What is Mr. Peterson’s character as to truthfulness?
A. I would always accept his statements.
Q. Is that generally true here?
A. That I can not tell you.
Q. Do you know his general reputation for truth and veracity?
A. I think I do.
Q. From that character would you believe him on oath?
A. I would.
Q. Do you regard him as a truthful man?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know the general reputation of Cornwell as to truth and veracity?
A. I have never heard it questioned.
Q. From that reputation would you believe him on his oath?
A. Certainly.
Q. How about Mr. Colburn; from your general knowledge of his reputation for truth and veracity, would you believe him on his oath?
A. He has the reputation of being sharp in business practices. I am loath to say I would not take his word under oath.
Q. Has it been the practice of any foreign nation or nations to land troops here in case of disturbance?
A. I never saw it done except on the part of American forces. When [Page 738] Kalakaua was put on the throne both English and American forces werelanded. Admiral Skerrett was the captain of the Portsmouth.
Q. What effect was produced on the mind of the native population by the landing of American marines on the 16th of January, 1893?
A. The effect was to intimidate them.
Q. Was that intimidation helpful to the movers in the revolution?
A. Most certainly.
Q. Could they have succeeded without the impression that they were backed by the United States forces?
A. They would not have undertaken it without. I feel sure of that.
Q. What was the condition at that time in the city as to peaceful ness?
A. It was the most peaceful, law-abiding community you would see anywhere.
Q. The stores open as usual?
A. Yes. They closed the stores on the 16th so as to let everybody attend the mass meeting.
Q. Were women and children going about on the streets as usual?
A. Yes.
Q. Did the people go back to their stores after the mass meeting?
A. I think not. It was late in the afternoon.
Q. Was it on account of the lateness of the hour that they did not go back to their stores?
A. Yes; that was the only reason. There was no disorder. Women and children on the street.
Q. The next morning, the morning of the 17th, were people going about as usual?
A. I saw no difference. Our place opened up and I think all the rest of the places on Queen street opened up.
Q. Sometime during the day of the 17th were you sent for to go to the Government building?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What time in the day was that?
A. About 6 o’clock, I think. I dine at half past 5, and during dinner I was rung up, and went down to the Government building with Mr. Mehrtens, who came for me.
Q. Were you sent for by the parties in this new movement?
A. I do not know that. I was taken by Mehrtens right to the Government building.
Q. And brought in the presence of whom?
A. The Provisional Government.
Q. Please state what occurred there?
A. There was a deal of excitement. I asked why I had been sent for. I do not know who answered me. I was told a committee was going over to the Queen—that I was to go with the committee. I went with the committee.
Q. They didn’t ask you to go, just told you you were to go?
A. I was told that there was a committee to be sent to the Queen and I was wanted to go.
Q. For what purpose?
A. To state to her that the Provisional Government had been formed and that she was deposed, and to assist her in making any protest she might want to make.
Q. Did you go?
A. Yes.
Q. Please state what occurred?
[Page 739]A. We went into the blue room. Her Majesty and one or both of the princes were there. Her ministers were there—Mr. Widemann, Mr. MacFarlane. Mr. Damon I suppose was the committee. I do not know whether there was more than one. I went with him. Mr. Damon made a few remarks, in which he said that the Provisional Government had been formed; that she was deposed, and that she could make a protest if she desired. There was a pause. I spoke up and said it was an unpleasant thing to be present on such an occasion. She had my sympathy; that it was a question of yielding to force; that if she would accept my advice she would yield and counsel her people to be quiet and orderly; that I should advise the surrender of the station house and barracks; that in case she acted in the line I marked out, I believed her case would be a better one for presentation at Washington.
Q. What force did you refer to?
A. The forces of the Provisional Government, backed by the Boston.
Q. Was it your impression that the Boston forces would coöperate with the Provisional Government forces?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Had the Provisional Government been recognized?
A. That is a matter of hearsay. It was commonly reported so on the street.
Q. You were in the crowd at the Government building when they sent for you?
A. I overheard that Mr. Stevens had recognized the Provisional Government.
Q. Was it the common acceptation in that crowd, so far as you could see or hear?
A. In the afternoon it was the understanding on the street that Mr. Stevens had recognized the Government. I heard a rumor that Stevens had recognized the Government and that a steamer was to be chartered and sent with commissioners to Washington.
Q. That occurred on the streets?
A. Yes; I heard it on the streets before I went to dinner.
Q. In a conversation with me you referred to certain newspaper articles pointing to the character of the Queen. What were they?
A. A sermon in the Commercial Advertiser of February 17, 1893, preached by the Rev. E. G. Beckwith on the accession of the Queen.
Q. Who is he?
A. Pastor of the Central Union Church.
Q. Is he an Englishman?
A. An American.
Q. What denomination is his church.
A. Congregational.
Q. What was the other article?
A. A leading article in the same paper of February 5, 1891, and the Bulletin of June 26, 1891, containing an account of the Oahu College jubilee, naming the persons present, among whom was the Queen.
Q. Did you ever attend a breakfast given by the American minister to the ex-Queen?
A. I did, with my wife.
Q. When was that?
A. April 19, 1892.
Q. Who was present besides the Queen?
A. Hon. Jonathan Austin; Hon. S. M. Damon and wife; Hon. and Mrs. Samuel Parker; Mr. Haines, of San Francisco; Mr. and Mrs. H. W. Severance; [Page 740] Mr. and Mrs. Mizner, late United States minister to Guatemala; Hon. and Mrs. W. G. Irwin; Lieut. Dyer, U. S. Navy; Dr. Clarke, U. S. Navy; Mrs. Henry Waterhouse and others.
Q. These people were invited to meet the Queen, were they?
A. Yes, sir.
I have carefully read the foregoing and pronounce it to be an accurate report of my interview with Mr. Blount.