Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T09:16:37.381Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fit for Annexation but Unfit to Vote?

Debating Hawaiian Suffrage Qualifications at the Turn of the Twentieth Century

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2016

Lauren L. Basson
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In the wake of Hawaii's annexation by the United States, congressmen engaged in a series of intense debates about the suffrage laws that would govern the new territory. This article documents how these 1900 congressional debates contributed to a growing schism between the territorial definition of the state and the sociopolitical definition of the nation. The state officially expanded beyond the North American continent while the definition of the nation remained racially restrictive. A simultaneous espousal of inclusive, universalistic principles and exclusive, racist preferences characterized efforts among European American policy makers and political observers to exercise political domination over indigenous Hawaiians while, at the same time, maintaining white control of political power.

Type
Articles
Information
Social Science History , Volume 29 , Issue 4 , winter 2005 , pp. 575 - 598
Copyright
Copyright © Social Science History Association 2005

References

Alexander, Gregory S. (1997) Commodity and Propriety: Competing Visions of Property in American Legal Thought, 1776–1970. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, Benedict (1991) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Armstrong, W. N. (1900a) “Hawaii at Washington: How the opposition bungled.” Pacific Commercial Advertiser, February 27: 1.Google Scholar
Armstrong, W. N. (1900b) “Islands at Washington: Newsy letter from Mr. W. N. Armstrong.” Pacific Commercial Advertiser, April 16: 1.Google Scholar
Bell, Roger (1984) Last among Equals: Hawaiian Statehood and American Politics. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Bishop, Sereno (1900) “Dr. Bishop on Hawaii speaks of our present and our needs.” Pacific Commercial Advertiser, April 11: 9.Google Scholar
Evans, Julie, Grimshaw, Patricia, Phillips, David, and Swain, Shurlee (2003) Equal Subjects, Unequal Rights: Indigenous People in British Settler Colonies, 1830-1910. New York: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Fry, Joseph F. (1989) “Strange expansionist bedfellows: Newlands, Morgan, and Hawaii.” Halcyon 11: 105–24.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, Patricia (2000) “Settler anxieties, indigenous peoples, and women’s suffrage in the colonies of Australia, New Zealand, and Hawai’i, 1888 to 1902.” Pacific Historical Review 69: 553–72.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, Patricia, Reynolds, Robert, and Swain, Shurlee (2001) “The paradox of ‘ultrademocratic’ government: Indigenous peoples’ civil rights in nineteenth-century New Zealand, Canada, and Australia,” in Diane Elizabeth, Kirkby and Coleborne, Catharine (eds.) Law, History, Colonialism: The Reach of Empire. New York: Manchester University Press: 78–90.Google Scholar
Harris, Cheryl (1995) “Whiteness as property,” in Crenshaw, Kimberlé, Gotanda, Neil, Peller, Garry, and Thomas, Kendall (eds.) Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings that Formed the Movement. New York: New Press: 276–91.Google Scholar
Kantrowitz, Stephen (2000a) Ben Tillman and the Reconstruction of White Supremacy. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Kantrowitz, Stephen (2000b) “Ben Tillman and Hendrix McLane, agrarian rebels: White manhood, ‘The Farmers, ’ and the limits of southern populism.” Journal of Southern History 66: 497–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Desmond (2000) Making Americans: Immigration, Race, and the Origins of the Diverse Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Loomis, Albertine (1976) For Whom Are the Stars? Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii and Friends of the Library of Hawaii.Google Scholar
Merry, Sally E. (2000) Colonizing Hawaii: The Cultural Power of Law. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Moore, Jamie W. (1973) “Ben Tillman and government for Hawaii.” Proceedings of the South Carolina Historical Association: 5–19.Google Scholar
Pacific Commercial Advertiser (1900a) “The amended suffrage.” April 6: 4.Google Scholar
Pacific Commercial Advertiser (1900b) “Ruining the territorial bill.” April 16: 4.Google Scholar
Osborne, Thomas J. (1981) “Empire Can Wait.”: American Opposition to Hawaiian Annexation, 1893-1898. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.Google Scholar
Pratt, Julius W. (1936) Expansionists of 1898: The Acquisition of Hawaii and the Spanish Islands. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Rose, Carol M. (1994) Property and Persuasion: Essays on the History, Theory, and Rhetoric of Ownership. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
Simkins, Francis Butler (1937) “Ben Tillman’s view of the Negro.” Journal of Southern History 3: 161–74.Google Scholar
Smith, Rogers (1997) Civic Ideals: Conflicting Visions of Citizenship in U.S. History. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
U.S. Congress (1900a) Congressional Record. 56th Cong., 1st sess. 33: 3702–23.Google Scholar
U.S. Congress (1900b) Congressional Record. 56th Cong., 1st sess. 33: 1918–34.Google Scholar
U.S. Congress (1900c) Congressional Record. 56th Cong., 1st sess. 33: 2022–33.Google Scholar
U.S. Congress (1900d) Congressional Record. 56th Cong., 1st sess. 33: 2179–96.Google Scholar
U.S. Congress (1900e) Congressional Record. 56th Cong., 1st sess. 33: 2239–57.Google Scholar
Williams, Herbert P. (1900) “Hawaii is his theme: Herbert P.Williams in the Outlook .” Pacific Commercial Advertiser, April 28: 11.Google Scholar