English VI.

Question: "Resolved. That Hawaii should be speedily annexed to the United States."

Brief for the Affirmative.

T. SPALDING and V. S. THOMAS.Best general references: Snow's American Diplomacy, 361-397; Forum, XV, 1 (March, 1893); North Am. Review, vol. 156, pp. 265-281 (March, 1893), vol. 157, pp. 736-745 (Dec. 1893); Cong. Rec. 1894, pp. 2208-2212 (Draper); 4994-5010 (Higgins); Sen. Report on Hawaiian Affairs, 1894, pp. 77-84, 91-102.

I. Annexation would benefit Hawaii: North Am. Rev. vol. 156, pp. 271-281: Cong. Rec. 1894, pp. 5009-5010. - (a) Commercially. - (b) Politically.

II. Annexation is practicable. - (a) Desired by Hawaiian Government and people. - (b) Constitutional. - (c) Accords with our policy. - (1) Favored by Marcy, Seward, Fish, Blaine, et al. - (2) Hawaii is part of American system: Cong. Rec. 1894, p. 5009; North Am. Rev. 157, p. 741. - (x) In situation. - (y) In customs. - (d) Offers no administrative obstacles. - (1) No colonial policy required. - (2) Hawaii's institutions are harmonious. - (3) Hawaii is handy. - (4) Race question not serious. - (5) No large navy required.

III. Annexation is desirable commercially. - (a)Hawaii's prosperity benefits our producers and carriers: Cong. Rec. 1894, p. 5009; North Am. Rev. vol. 156, pp. 271-280. - (b) Hawaii's friendly stability fosters our commerce: Cong. Rec. 1894, pp. 2209, 2211. - (1) Assures coal for our merchantmen. - (2) Prevents Hawaii becoming a base for hostile commerce destroyers.

IV. Annexation is desirable politically: Forum, XV, 1; North Am. Rev. vol. 156, p. 270; Cong. Rec., 1894, pp. 2208-2212; pp. 5009-5010. - (a) Gives U. S. a naval base for offence. - (b) Prevents Hawaii becoming a base of hostile attack.

V. Protectorate would not guarantee security: Cong. Rec., 1894, pp. 5009-5010; Cong. Rec., 1894, pp. 2209-2210; North Am. Rev. vol. 157, p. 743. - (a) Treaties subject to abrogation e.g. Pearl Harbor. - (b) At outbreak of war Hawaii would be seized. - (c) Liability to insidious change of sentiment e.g. by Japanese or British getting control: Ad. Walker in Boston Advertiser, Dec. 20, 1894.

Brief for the Negative.

W. L. VAN KLEECK and J. W. WORTHINGTON.Best general references: C. Schurz in Harper's Monthly, vol. 87, p. 737 (1893); T. M. Cooley in Forum, XV, p. 387; N. A. Rev. vol. 156, p. 282; ibid, vol. 159, p. 745; Nation, vol. 56, pp. 75, 96; Cong. Rec., XXVI, pr. 1402, ff., 698, 2897-8, 2997, 3123.

I. Annexation is opposed to the policy of the United States. - (a) Efforts to annex Cuba, St. Thomas, St. Domingo defeated. - (b) Louisiana, Florida, Texas, Alaska do not furnish precedents: Schurz in Harper; Cooley in Forum.

II. Annexation is unnecessary. - (a) Present treaty secures all rights: Nation, above. - (b) Annexation would not alter trade relations. - (c) No danger of foreign control. - (1) England does not want Hawaii. - (2) Hawaiian sympathies are with the U. S. - (d) We do not need Hawaii as a stronghold.

III. Annexation is inexpedient. - (a) Bad effect on our social and political institutions. - (1) Uncongenial population. - (2) Unfit for citizenship. - (3) Serious problems involved. - (b) Hawaii would always be colonial, (c) Annexation would establish dangerous precedent.

IV. The question is best solved by Hawaiian independence with implied protectorate: Minister Stevens, quoted in Pres. Cleveland's Message, Dec. 18, 1893.