Jennifer Wada at 00:42, 28 April 2006

2006-04-28T00:42:51Z

Jennifer Wada at 09:38, 10 March 2006

2006-03-10T09:38:42Z

New page

joint resolution for annexation was
substantially the same as the treaty
negotiated in the prior year with the
Republic of Hawaii, which was duly
ratified by its Senate. 273/
Soon after annexation, a
territorial government was established
for Hawaii under the Act of April 30,
1900 (31 Stat. 141). As early as 1903
the legislature of the Territory of
Hawaii began to petition Congress for
statehood. 274/ As in the case of
Alaska, the question of statehood for
Hawaii was the subject of numerous
Congressional hearings and debates for
many years. The proceedings in which
Hawaiian statehood was discussed
reflect that politics, both in the
United States and on the islands, was
a jiajor factor in delaying Hawaii's
transformation from territory to
state.
The political situation in Hawaii
was best summarized by John A. Burns,
Delegate from Hawaii, in his article
entitled, "Statehood and Hawaii's
People." 275/ He described the
Hawaiian achievement of statehood as
the conquering of centralized
government and the emergence of
Hawaii's people. He admitted that the
overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy in
1893 was an unpopular event and that
the Hawaiian people distrusted the new
Provisional Government. Its rule was
much more stringent than that of the
monarchy since a large portion of the
general public was prevented from
voting, while power remained in the
hands of the propertied class. Burns
stated that the unpopularity of the
annexation was not because of
animosity toward the United States,
but rather a resentment for the
particular ruling party.
Directly after annexation, a
commission was set up to compose an
Organic Act for Hawaii. According to
Barns, two Hawaiian members of the
commission wished to add a property
a id income requirement to the
educational qualifications for voting*
This provision would have prevented
the majority of the Hawaiian people
from voting. The efforts of Senator
Tillman of South Carolina blocked such
a measure, however, and the Organic
Act was passed in 1900 with only a
literacy requirement for voters.
The Territorial government
continued to be extremely restrictive.
Even though the Territorial
legislature had passed measures for
erecting county governments, the
Territorial executive repeatedly
vetoed them. Finally, the situation
evoked a Congressional investigation.
This resulted in an ultimatum by
Congress that called for the Territory
to organize county governments quickly
or Congress would do so. After this
directive, the Territorial executive
allowed a local government bill to
pass.
Delegate Burns listed a number of
other reasons why statehood was
delayed for Hawaii: besides county
government, the Hawaiian Homes
Commission, the bill of rights, and
other projects all involved excessive
amounts of time. In addition to
these reasons, the controlling
economic and political groups strongly
opposed statehood for their own
interests. After amendments were made
to the Agricultural Adjustment Act by
the Act of May 9, 1934 (48 Stat. 670),
placing strict limits on the amount of
sugar imported from Hawaii into the
continental United States, and
extensive investigations were made
into other Hawaiian affairs, the
controlling groups were compelled to
support statehood.
By 1935, Hawaiian statehood
hearings had become more active. It
was then suggested that a plebiscite
be held to determine whether Hawaiian
citizens approved of the statehood
proposal. A plebiscite held in 1940
showed a majority of the residents of
Hawaii favoring admission to the
Union. At that point, however,
309

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 negotiated in the prior year with the
 Republic of Hawaii, which was duly
-ratified by its Senate. 273/
+ratified by its Senate. <u>273</u>/
 Soon after annexation, a
 territorial government was established
@@ Line 10: / Line 11: @@
 the legislature of the Territory of
 Hawaii began to petition Congress for
-statehood. 274/ As in the case of
+statehood. <u>274</u>/ As in the case of
 Alaska, the question of statehood for
 Hawaii was the subject of numerous
@@ Line 18: / Line 19: @@
 reflect that politics, both in the
 United States and on the islands, was
-a jiajor factor in delaying Hawaii's
+a major factor in delaying Hawaii's
 transformation from territory to
 state.
 The political situation in Hawaii
 was best summarized by John A. Burns,
 Delegate from Hawaii, in his article
 entitled, "Statehood and Hawaii's
-People." 275/ He described the
+People." <u>275</u>/ He described the
 Hawaiian achievement of statehood as
 the conquering of centralized
@@ Line 44: / Line 46: @@
 but rather a resentment for the
 particular ruling party.
 Directly after annexation, a
 commission was set up to compose an
@@ Line 49: / Line 52: @@
 Barns, two Hawaiian members of the
 commission wished to add a property
-a id income requirement to the
+and income requirement to the
-educational qualifications for voting*
+educational qualifications for voting.
 This provision would have prevented
 the majority of the Hawaiian people
@@ Line 58: / Line 61: @@
 Act was passed in 1900 with only a
 literacy requirement for voters.
 The Territorial government
 continued to be extremely restrictive.
@@ Line 73: / Line 77: @@
 allowed a local government bill to
 pass.
 Delegate Burns listed a number of
 other reasons why statehood was
@@ Line 93: / Line 98: @@
 controlling groups were compelled to
 support statehood.
 By 1935, Hawaiian statehood
 hearings had become more active. It
@@ Line 102: / Line 108: @@
 Hawaii favoring admission to the
 Union. At that point, however,
+{{p|309}}

Template:Nhsc-v1-309 - Revision history

Jennifer Wada at 00:42, 28 April 2006

Jennifer Wada at 09:38, 10 March 2006