The Record on Annexation: Hawaiʻi, 1842 to 1993

Introduction

For more than a century, the story of Hawaiʻi's loss of independence has been told in pieces: a treaty here, a resolution there, an apology decades later. Put together in order, the pieces tell a clearer story. The Kingdom of Hawaiʻi was a recognized state. Its government was overthrown with the help of the United States. The President of the United States called the overthrow an act of war and proposed restoring the Queen. The restoration did not happen, and the nation was annexed five years later. The apology that followed nearly a century afterward acknowledged the wrong but did not settle any claims.

This page follows the record in order.

A Recognized State

The Kingdom of Hawaiʻi was not a territory waiting to be claimed. It had a written constitution, adopted in 1840. It had a legislature, courts, treaties, and diplomats. In 1842, the United States recognized its independence. The statement, made on behalf of the US government, became known as the Tyler Doctrine. In 1843, Britain and France jointly recognized the Kingdom as well. By the end of the 1880s, the Kingdom maintained diplomatic and consular representatives in many countries.

The Overthrow of 1893

In January 1893, a group of foreign residents formed a Committee of Safety with the aim of ending the monarchy. The US Minister to Hawaiʻi, John L. Stevens, supported the effort, and at his request US Marines and sailors landed in Honolulu on January 16. They took positions in the city.

On January 17, the Queen yielded her authority. Her written statement said she did so to avoid bloodshed, and that she did so under protest. She yielded, she wrote, to the superior force of the United States. The statement asked the United States to investigate and to right the wrong once it had full information. A provisional government, led by Sanford Dole, was proclaimed the same day.

The Stevens administration recognized the provisional government at the end of January. In February, outgoing President Benjamin Harrison sent a treaty of annexation to the Senate. Grover Cleveland took office in March and withdrew the treaty.

The Investigation

Cleveland sent James Henderson Blount, a former congressman from Georgia, to Honolulu to investigate. Blount's report, delivered on July 17, 1893, found that Stevens had encouraged the revolution and that the United States landed troops without lawful authority. It also found that the Queen had yielded to the United States, not to the provisional government.

The President's Message

On December 18, 1893, Cleveland sent his message to Congress. He wrote that the overthrow was "by an act of war, committed with the participation of a diplomatic representative of the United States and without authority of Congress," and that the government of "a feeble but friendly and confiding people" had been overthrown. He concluded that the provisional government "owes its existence to an armed invasion by the United States." He proposed that Congress restore the Queen, with amnesty for those involved in the overthrow.

The Restoration That Did Not Happen

Cleveland sent Albert Willis to Honolulu to carry out the restoration. The Queen agreed to be restored, on conditions. She wanted the leaders of the overthrow held to account, and the amnesty terms did not allow that. The provisional government refused to give up power. Congress did not act.

The restoration was never carried out. The government that the United States had recognized for more than half a century was not put back in place.

The Republic and Its Aftermath

On July 4, 1894, the provisional government declared the Republic of Hawaiʻi, with Sanford Dole as president. In January 1895, royalists led by Robert Wilcox attempted a counter-revolution against the Republic. It failed. The Queen was arrested and imprisoned at Iolani Palace, and she was forced to sign a document of abdication. Many of her supporters were imprisoned or exiled.

In February 1894, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, chaired by John Tyler Morgan, issued a report concluding that Stevens was not responsible and that the landing of troops was justified to protect American lives and property. Historians have rejected the report's conclusions, because they do not match the Blount investigation or the President's own message.

Annexation

In 1897, the Republic and the United States signed a treaty of annexation. Native Hawaiians opposed it. Petitions against annexation, organized by Hui Aloha ʻĀina, were submitted to Congress with about 21,000 signatures. The treaty did not receive the two-thirds vote in the Senate needed for ratification.

Congress then used a different route. On July 7, 1898, the Newlands Resolution annexed Hawaiʻi by joint resolution, which required only a simple majority in both houses. The resolution transferred the Crown and government lands, about 1.8 million acres, to the United States.

Advocates and scholars have argued since then that a joint resolution is not a treaty, and that a government created by overthrow could not give away a kingdom it did not hold. Courts and Congress have treated the annexation as effective. That disagreement is at the center of the debate.

The Territory and Statehood

On April 30, 1900, President McKinley signed the Organic Act, which set up the Territory of Hawaiʻi. The territory's government operated under federal law.

In March 1959, Congress passed the Hawaii Admission Act, and President Eisenhower signed it on March 18. The act offered statehood to Hawaiʻi pending ratification by its people. A plebiscite was held on June 27, 1959. The question on the ballot was whether Hawaiʻi should be admitted to the Union as a state, and voters could choose statehood or remaining a territory. Independence was not on the ballot.

The results were 132,773 votes for statehood and 7,971 against, about 94 percent of ballots cast. A total of 140,744 ballots were cast, from a voting-age population of about 360,000. That means the share of eligible voters who voted yes was far lower than 94 percent. Both figures matter.

Many Native Hawaiians opposed statehood and said so. Their opposition is part of the record. The United States has treated the 1959 vote as valid, and its courts and Congress have acted on that basis. Many Native Hawaiians do not accept that position. Their view is that the vote could not undo a government overthrown by the United States, or the wrong the United States had admitted. A vote held after a wrong is still a vote on what the wrong left behind.

Hawaiʻi became the 50th state on August 21, 1959.

The Apology of 1993

On November 23, 1993, Congress passed Public Law 103-150, known as the Apology Resolution. Its recitals repeat the findings of the Blount Report and the President's 1893 message. It acknowledges the overthrow and the role of the United States, and it apologizes to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the United States.

Section 3 of the resolution states: "Nothing in this Joint Resolution is intended to serve as a settlement of any claims against the United States." The resolution does not return land, restore a government, or create any enforceable right. In Hawaii v. Office of Hawaiian Affairs (2009), the US Supreme Court held that the disclaimer does not recognize claims against the State of Hawaiʻi.

For many Native Hawaiians, an apology without a remedy leaves the harm in place. The wrong was admitted, and nothing was returned.

The Double Standard

Consider how the law treats the same act depending on who carries it out. In 1893, a group of foreign residents, backed by US troops, seized the government of a recognized state. No one among them was prosecuted, and the United States later proposed restoring the government, then let that restoration fail.

Under federal law, treason includes levying war against the United States or adhering to its enemies. Had Native Hawaiians taken the government of a US state, with a foreign power's backing, the charge would have been treason, and the penalties under federal law include death or imprisonment. The act is the same. The difference is who committed it, and who the law was written to protect.

What Justice Requires, in the Community's View

Many Native Hawaiians argue that justice requires more than an apology. Their demands include:

• A formal return of the Crown and government lands taken at annexation, or a settlement that the Hawaiian people accept as fair.
• Recognition of Native Hawaiian governance, decided by Native Hawaiians.
• A remedy for the loss of government and the institutions that followed.

These are positions held by Native Hawaiians and their advocates. Courts and governments have not adopted them.

The Continuity Question

Some advocates argue more broadly that the Hawaiian Kingdom still exists as a state, and that the occupation continues. That claim rests on the view that the 1893 overthrow removed a government but not the state. The Council of Regency, formed in 1996, and the proclamation of 2014 are part of that effort.

US courts have not accepted the continuity claim. Courts and governments have treated the State of Hawaiʻi as the lawful authority. The claim is a legal theory, and it is presented here as the position of its advocates.

Sources

1. Blount Report, Executive Document 47, 53rd Congress, 2nd Session
2. Grover Cleveland, Message to Congress, December 18, 1893
3. Liliʻuokalani, Protest, January 17, 1893
4. Morgan Report, Senate Report 227, 53rd Congress, 2nd Session
5. Newlands Resolution, Public Resolution 55, 55th Congress, July 7, 1898
6. Organic Act, 31 Stat. 141 (1900)
7. Hawaii Admission Act, Public Law 86-3 (1959), and the June 27, 1959 plebiscite results
8. Public Law 103-150 (Apology Resolution), 107 Stat. 1510 (1993)
9. Hawaii v. Office of Hawaiian Affairs, 556 U.S. 163 (2009)
10. Kameʻeleihiwa, Native Land and Foreign Desires (1992)
11. Silva, Aloha Betrayed (2004)
12. Kūʻē petitions, Hawaiʻi State Archives