Royal Proclamation of Hawaiian Neutrality: Editorial, The Polynesian, 1861

From The Polynesian: Saturday, September 14, 1861:

We call our readers' attention to the Royal Proclamation in another column touching the neutrality of this country pending the contest now waging between the United States of America and certain States thereof, styling themselves the Confederate States of America. Having been officially notified of the fact by the Hon. Th. J. Dryer, Commissioner of the United States at this Court, His Majesty has in this step but followed the example so promptly set by England, France, Spain, Belgium, and other powers, and it is to be hoped that nothing will happen to compromise the position now taken.

This Government had hoped that the disunion sentiment in the United States would have been quelled or appeased at an early day, but finding it assuming proportions too large to be ignored, and careful lest its hostile enterprises at sea might in any way compromise the friendly relations existing with the Government of the United States, or work any damage to their large commercial interests in this country, His Majesty has taken this early opportunity to proclaim his neutrality and his adherence, in principle, to the treaty of Paris, 1856, as regards the fitting out or harboring of privateers.

The neutrality of this Kingdom is understood to comprise one English marine league at sea, from low water mark, including the whole area of this archipelago, and the channels and seas between the different islands. in 1856 the Department of Foreign Relations notified the Foreign Diplomatic Representatives at Honolulu that the Domain of the Hawaiian Crown comprised the islands of Hawaii, Maui, Oahu, Kauai, Molokai, Lanai, Niihau, Kahoolawe, Nihoa (known as Bird's Island), Molokini, Lehua, Kaula, and all Reefs, Banks and Rocks contiguous to either of the above, or within the compass of the whole.

While the question or privateering is again engaging the attention of the civilized world, the principle modifying the ancient international law in this respect, as laid down by the Congress of Paris on the 16th of April, 1856, has, as we learn, been adhered to by the United States Government, it may not be amiss to mention, for it redounds to the honor of this country and its late King, that in his proclamation of neutrality, during the late great war between the maritime powers of Europe, and dated the 16th May, 1854, he prohibited privateering, directly or indirectly within his jurisdiction, thus by two years forestalling the enlightened sentiment which those great powers then adopted as an integral part of the international code. And the same just and lofty sentiment is again reiterated by the present King, in the proclamation which we to-day publish.

Setting aside the justice and equity which prompted the recognition of the above principle both then and now, it was due as much to the self-respect of this Government as to the implied treaty obligations, especially the 15th Article of the Treaty with Sweden, the constant friendly relations and the memory of the many kind offices received from the United States Government, as well as in consideration of the important fact that every year a fleet of American whalers and merchantmen, amounting in value to several millions of dollars, rendezvous at these islands-it was due that their property should not be needlessly be imperiled while within the domain of this Kingdom, or their enemies cruisers be emboldened by the silence of this Government to venture within its waters for hostile purposes or find shelter and accommodation, except such as humanity dictates, in its ports and harbors.

To proclaim neutrality, however, is one thing, and to enforce it is another. Strong and powerful governments are seldom imposed upon in this respect, and when they are, they right themselves as the occasion may call for; as the United States did in the Anglo-French war with Russia, when they sent the English Minister his passports for violating the neutrality of their country. But weak and small powers may not always be in a position to repel or resent an infraction of their neutrality. Still, if they have done their best and shown a proper disposition and spirit, there is no doubt that in justice, and international law and equity, the will will be taken for the deed, and such a power be held guiltless in the eyes of the world.