How do you think Congress responded to Liliuokalani’s letter? The letter, written by the last reigning monarch of Hawaii, Queen Liliuokalani, to the U.S. Congress in 1893, serves as a poignant testament to the political turmoil and the eventual overthrow of her monarchy. This article delves into the response of Congress to the queen’s plea for intervention, analyzing the historical context and the subsequent actions taken by the legislative body.
The letter from Queen Liliuokalani was a desperate appeal for help against the provisional government that had taken control of Hawaii. In it, she expressed her concerns about the illegal seizure of power and the threat it posed to the sovereignty of the Hawaiian Islands. The queen wrote, “I appeal to you, my countrymen and countrywomen, and to you, my friends and fellow citizens of the United States, to sustain me in the just cause of my country.” Despite her heartfelt plea, the response from Congress was lukewarm at best.
Upon receiving the letter, the U.S. House of Representatives formed a special committee to investigate the situation in Hawaii. The committee, however, was heavily influenced by the interests of American business leaders and sugar planters who had a significant stake in the islands. The committee’s report, released in December 1893, concluded that the provisional government had been established with the consent of the Hawaiian people and that there was no cause for U.S. intervention.
The Senate, on the other hand, took a more cautious approach. While acknowledging the queen’s concerns, it also recognized the interests of American citizens in Hawaii. The Senate passed a resolution urging the president to send a special envoy to Hawaii to assess the situation. However, the resolution did not explicitly call for the restoration of the monarchy or the removal of the provisional government.
The lukewarm response from Congress can be attributed to several factors. Firstly, the United States was in the midst of a political crisis of its own, with the nation grappling with issues such as the impeachment of President Grover Cleveland and the controversy surrounding the coinage of silver. Secondly, the interests of American business leaders in Hawaii played a significant role in shaping the government’s stance. These leaders were concerned about the potential loss of their investments if the monarchy were restored.
In conclusion, Congress’s response to Liliuokalani’s letter was characterized by a lack of decisive action. The U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate, influenced by the interests of American business leaders and the political climate of the time, failed to provide the necessary support to restore the Hawaiian monarchy. The eventual annexation of Hawaii by the United States in 1898 further solidified the fate of the Hawaiian Islands and marked the end of the monarchy.
