No. 2.
Mr. Willis to Mr. Gresham.
Honolulu, H. I., September 29, 1894. (Received October 20.)
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your instruction of the 31st ultimo, inclosing a dispatch of Rear-Admiral Walker of August 17.
After a lengthy statement seriously reflecting upon the late British minister and the commanding officer of the Champion and expressing such apprehensions touching the political situation here as necessitated the detention of the Philadelphia, the Admiral, in the eleventh paragraph, says: “Before reaching this conclusion [to postpone the Philadelphia’s departure] I consulted with the United States minister, whose views entirely coincided with my own.”
Your dispatch indicates that these words of the Admiral have been given a wider meaning than could have been intended by him. A brief recital of the facts may therefore be proper.
On the 5th day of August I was informed by the Admiral that he would leave with the Philadelphia on the 8th. On the 6th the British minister, Major Wodehouse, having been succeeded by Mr. Hawes, made his farewell official visit to this legation, during which he mentioned the fact that the Champion had intended to leave on that day, but some of the English residents had become nervous when they heard that the Philadelphia also was to leave, and yielding to their request, the Champion would remain until the Hyacinth arrived. Upon the same morning I made a parting call to the officers of the Philadelphia, when the Admiral told me that several citizens had expressed their regret at the departure of the Philadelphia before the arrival of the Charleston, which vessel was daily expected. He also expressed some surprise at the change of plans of the Champion. In view of these facts, he asked my opinion in regard to the detention of the Philadelphia. I replied that as the steamer Australia was due here August 11, at 8 a.m., which would probably bring correct advices as to the Charleston’s movements, I saw no reason, if not in conflict with his orders (as to the nature of which I was not informed), why the Philadelphia should not wait until then. When the Australia arrived, I immediately notified the Admiral that no news warranting his further stay had been received. He left the next morning.
It is this conversation and the unimportant result following it with which the Admiral connects me.
The statement as to the conduct and sentiments of the British minister and captain of the British cruiser, and especially as to their purpose to land troops for political advantage, and the dangers resulting therefrom to American interests, I can not confirm either from personal knowledge or reliable information. If called upon to express an opinion, I should be constrained to say that during the past six months, and especially since the proclamation of the Republic, the presence or absence of British war vessels here ought to have been regarded with indifference by our Government, as it is now by this Government.
The “petition of citizens” referred to by the Admiral I did not receive until the day after our conversation. The conditions here for many months had been extremely orderly and peaceful. As stated by the petition itself, there was “no reason to doubt the ability of the Government of the Republic of Hawaii to support and sustain itself [Page 1378] and furnish full protection to the lives and property of all residents in its territory.” In this opinion even the enemies of the Government concurred, furthermore, on the day after receiving the petition, Mr. Hatch, the minister of foreign affairs, expressed to me his regret that it had been sent, as those he represented welcomed the opportunity to prove to the world that they were able to take care of themselves. These I deemed sufficient reasons for not forwarding the petition.
With renewed assurances, etc.,