Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T23:08:24.089Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Political Instability of Reciprocal Trade and the Overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2009

Sumner J. La Croix  and
Christopher Grandy
Sumner J. La Croix
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Economics, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI 96822
Christopher Grandy
Affiliation:
Economist with the State of Hawaii, Department of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism, P.O. Box 2359, Honolulu, HI 96804
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy in 1893 offers an illuminating case study of the political economy of preferential trading relationships between large and small countries. The limited-term reciprocity treaty of 1876 between Hawaii and the United States generated problematic strategic dynamics, as the normal operation of the treaty gradually worsened Hawaii’s bargaining position. This allowed the United States to extract better terms when the treaty expired in 1883 and to act opportunistically in 1890 with the passage of the McKinley Tariff. The political economy of the treaty contributed significantly to the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Economic History , Volume 57 , Issue 1 , March 1997 , pp. 161 - 189
Copyright
Copyright © The Economic History Association 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allen, Helena G.The Betrayal of Liliuokalani, Last Queen of Hawaii 1838–1917. Honolulu: Mutual Publishing, 1982.Google Scholar
Beard, Charles A., and Beard, Mary R.. The Rise of American Civilization. Vol. 2. New York: Macmillan, 1927.Google Scholar
Brown, Henry A.Revised Analyses of the Sugar Question. Saxonville, MA, 1879. Microfiche. Sanford, NC: Microfilming Corp. of America, 1979.Google Scholar
Budnick, Rich. Stolen Kingdom. An American Conspiracy. Honolulu: Aloha Press, 1992.Google Scholar
Cameron, R. J.Year Book Australia 1985. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1985.Google Scholar
Coelho, Philip. “The Profitability of Imperialism: The British Experience in the West Indies 1768–1772.” Explorations in Economic History 10, no. 3, 1973: 253–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Lance, and Huttenback, RobertMammon and the Pursuit of Empire: The Political Economy of British Imperialism, 1860–1912. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1988.Google Scholar
De, Melo, Jaime, Arvind Panagariya, and Rodrik, Dani. “The New Regionalism: A Country Perspective” In New Dimensions in Regional Integration, edited by De Melo, Jaime and Panagariya, Arvind. Cambridge: Center for Economic Policy Research, 1993.Google Scholar
De, Varigny, Charles, . Fourteen Years in the Sandwich Islands: 1855–1868. Translated by Korn, Alfons L.. Honolulu: The University Press of Hawaii, 1981.Google Scholar
Dougherty, Michael. To Steal A Kingdom, Probing Hawaiian History. Rev. ed. Waimanalo HI: Island Style Press, 1994.Google Scholar
Friedman, Milton, and Schwartz, Anna J.. Monetary Trends in the United States and the United Kingdom: Their Relation to Income, Prices, and Interest Rates, 1867–1975. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galloway, J. H.The Sugar Cane Industry, An Historical Geography from its Origins to 1914. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.Google Scholar
Grossman, Gene M., and Helpman, Elhanan. “Trade Wars and Trade Talks” Journal of Political Economy 103, no. 4 (1995): 675–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hitch, Thomas Kemper. Islands in Transition: The Past, Present, and Future of Hawaii’s Economy. Honolulu: First Hawaiian Bank, 1992.Google Scholar
Iaukea, C. P.Biennial Report of the Commissioners of Crown Lands 1894. Honolulu: Hawaiian Gazette Company, 1894.Google Scholar
Kemp, Murray C.A Contribution to the General Equilibrium Theory of Preferential Trading. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1969.Google Scholar
Kennan, John, and Riezman, Raymond. “Do Big Countries Win Tariff Wars?” International Economic Review 29, no. 1 (1988): 81–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kent, Noel J. Hawaii, Islands Under the Influence. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1983. Reprint, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1993.Google Scholar
Kubat, Daniel, and Thornton, David. A Statistical Profile of Canadian Society. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson Limited, 1974.Google Scholar
Kuykendall, Ralph S.The Hawaiian Kingdom, 1778–1854: Foundation and Transformation. Vol. 1. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuykendall, Ralph S.The Hawaiian Kingdom, 1854–1874: Twenty Critical Years. Vol. 2. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1938.Google Scholar
Kuykendall, S.. The Hawaiian Kingdom, 1874–1893: The Kalakaua Dynasty. Vol. 3. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
La, Croix, Sumner, J., and Roumasset, James. “The Evolution of Private Property in Nineteenth-Century Hawaii.” this JOURNAL 50, no.4 (1990): 829–52.Google Scholar
Laughlin, , Laurence, J., and Willis, H. Parker. Reciprocity. New York: The Baker & Taylor Co., 1903.Google Scholar
Liliuokalani, . Hawaii’s Story by Hawaii’s Queen. Boston: Lee and Shepard, 1898. Reprint, Honolulu: Mutual Publishing, 1990.Google Scholar
Lind, Andrew W.An Island Community, Ecological Succession in Hawaii. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1938.Google Scholar
Mayer, Wolfgang. “Theoretical Considerations on Negotiated Tariff Adjustments.” Oxford Economic Papers 33, no. 1 (1981) 135–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaren, John. “Size, Sunk Costs, and Judge Bowker’s Objection to Free Trade.” New York: Department of Economics, Columbia University, 08 1995. Forthcoming in The American Economic Review.Google Scholar
Ministry of Finance. Biennial Report of the Minister of Finance. Honolulu: various publishers, 1874–1888.Google Scholar
Mollett, J. A.Capital in Hawaiian Sugar Its Formation and Relation to Labor and Output, 1870–1957. Agricultural Economics Bulletin no. 21. Honolulu: Hawaii Agricultural Experiment Station, 1961.Google Scholar
Morgan, , Theodore. Hawaii, A Century of Economic Change: 1778–1876. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, G. D.The Tariff in the Australian Colonies, 1856–1900. Melbourne: F. W. Cheshire, 1968.Google Scholar
Pratt, Julius W. “The Hawaiian Revolution: A Re-Interpretation.” Pacific Historical Review 1, no. 3 (1932): 273–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, Chalfant. A History of Two Reciprocity Treaties: The Treaty with Canada in 1854, The Treaty with the Hawaiian Islands in 1876. New Haven: Tuttle, Morehouse & Taylor Press, 1904.Google Scholar
Rowland, Donald. “Orientals and the Suffrage in Hawaii.” Pacific Historical Review 12, no.1 (1943): 11–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russ, William Adam Jr. The Hawaiian Revolution (1893–94). Selinsgrove: Susquehanna University Press, 1959. Reprint, London: Associated University Presses, 1992.Google Scholar
Russ, William Adam, The Hawaiian Republic (1894–98), And Its Struggle to Win Annexation. Selinsgrove: Susquehanna University Press, 1961. Reprint, London: Associated University Presses, 1992.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Robert C.Historical Statistics of Hawaii. Honolulu: The University Press of Hawaii, 1977.Google Scholar
Searle, John E. Jr. A Few Facts Concerning the Hawaiian Reciprocity Treaty. Washington, DC: Thomas McGill & Co, 1886.Google Scholar
Shoemaker, James H.Labor in the Territory of Hawaii, 1939. Washington, DC: GPO, 1940.Google Scholar
Tate, Merze. The United States and the Hawaiian Kingdom, A Political History. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1965.Google Scholar
Tate, Merze. Hawaii: Reciprocity or Annexation. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1968.Google Scholar
Taussig, Frank W. “Reciprocity” Quarterly Journal of Economics 7, (10 1892): 26–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reprinted in Taussig, F. W.. Free Trade, the Tariff and Reciprocity. New York: Macmillan, 1920.Google Scholar
Tassing, Frank W.The Tariff History of the United States. 6th ed.New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, The Knickerbocker Press, 1914.Google Scholar
Taylor, William H. The Hawaiian Sugar Industry. Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley, 1935.Google Scholar
“The Revenue Bill.” Congressional Record. (2 09 1890) 9535–40. Vol. 21, Pt. 10.Google Scholar
“The Tariff Bill.” Congressional Record. (9 05 1890) 4385–97. Vol. 21, Pt. 5.Google Scholar
“The Tariff Bill,” Congressional Record. (20 05 1890) 4991–5002. Vol. 21, pt. 5.Google Scholar
U.S. Bureau of the Census. Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970. Washington, DC: GPO, 1975.Google Scholar
U.S. House. 1876. Committee on Ways and Means. Report, Hawaiian Treaty, 44th Cong., lst sess.Rept. 116, pts. 1,2.Google Scholar
U.S. House. 1883 H. Rept. 1860. 47th Cong., 2d sess.Google Scholar
U.S. House. 1891. H. Rept. 3422. 51st Cong., 2d sess.Google Scholar
U.S. Senate. 1867. “Message of the President of the United States.” 40th Cong., 1st sess.Google Scholar
U.S. Senate. 1883. S. Rept. 1013. 47th Cong., 2d sess.Google Scholar
U.S. Senate. 1893a. S. Executive Doc. 76. 52d Cong., 2d sess.Google Scholar
U.S. Senate. 1893b. S. Executive Doe. 77. 52d Cong., 2d sess.Google Scholar
U.S. Senate. 1898. Constitutions of Hawaii. S. Doc. 109. 55th Cong., 2d sess.Google Scholar
U.S. Senate. 1901. S. Doc. 231, Pt. 6. 56th Cong., 2d sess.Google Scholar
U.S. Senate. 1894. “The Sugar Schedule in the Tariff Bill of 1894.” 5. Rept. 603. 53rd Cong., 2d sess.Google Scholar
U.S. Tariff Commission. Refined Sugar Costs, Prices, and Profits. Washington, DC: GPO, 1920.Google Scholar
Vousden, Neil. The Economics of Trade Protection. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wells, David A.The Sugar Industry of the United States and the Tariff. New York: Evening Post Press, 1878.Google Scholar
Willet and Gray’s Weekly Statistical Sugar Trade Journal, Vol. 16, no. 52, 29 12 1892, New York.Google Scholar
Williams, Rayburn M.The Politics of Boom and Bust in Twentieth Century America: A Macroeconomic History. Minneapolis/St. Paul: West Publishing Company, 1993.Google Scholar
Wright, Philip G.Sugar In Relation to the Tariff. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1924.Google Scholar