Template:Nhsc-v1-319

From GrassrootWiki
Revision as of 03:24, 10 March 2006 by Jennifer Wada (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Vol. I, No. 3, Ralph S. Kuykendall, p. 42 (1926). Note: Entire Dispatch No. 122 reprinted in Hawaiian Diplomatic Correspondence.) 27/ Burns, p. 168. 28/ Bailey, p. 285. 29/ Joesting, p. 213. 30/ Damon, p. 160. 31/ Joesting, p. 214. 32/ Ibid. 33/ Mellen, p. 102. 3_4/ Ibid., p. 103. 35/ Bailey, p. 286. 36/ Mellen, p. 107. 49/ Damon, p. 192. 37/ See comment received from Robert C. Schmitt, p. 3. 38/ Mellen, p. 115. 39/ Ibid., p. 120. 40/ Ibid., p. 121. 41/ Bailey, p. <187. 42/ Mellen, p. 122. 43/ Damon, p. 166. 44/ Mellen, p. 125. 45/ Bailey, p. 288. 46/ Mellen, p. 164. 47/ Damon, p. 175. 48/ Mellen, p. 169. 50/ Joesting, p. 217. Congressman Daniel Akaka comments that the Draft Report on page 184, "indicates that the spark that ignited the annexationists was the signing of a b i l l to regulate the sale of opium and a b i l l to e s t a b l i s h a l o t t e r y" (Akaka's Comments, pp. 5-6). In addition, it is asserted that these b i l l s "...were merely used as excuses by the annexationists to bring down the Monarchy" (Akaka's Comments, p. 6 ) . Other commenters raised a similar point. The draft report does not refer to the l o t t e r y b i l l u n t i l page 190, in the section on Liliuokalani*s reign. Moreover, the comments do not accurately reflect the chronology of events. The l o t t e r y b i l l was enacted in 1893—not in 1886-1887 which is the period discussed at pages 184-185 of the draft r e p o r t . More importantly, the statement cited in support of these comments is a December 20, 1893 statement made with respect to conditions in 1893 and not events in 1886-1887. Finally, pages 184-185 of the draft report refer to the "reformers"—not "annexationists." 51/ Damon, p. 192. 52/ Joesting, p. 217. 53/ Bailey, p. 21. 5_4/ I b i d . , p. 291. 55/ Joesting, p. 218. 56/ Bailey, p. 295. 57/ Senator Daniel Inouye and others commented that the Draft Report f a i l s to inquire into the possible role of the United States Government in the adoption of the 1887 Constitution; i . e . , the extent to 319