The existing government was to continue, but the President was to have his personal representative there with an absolute veto power. And then the article goes on to provide: "Congress shall, within one year from the exchange of the ratifications of this treaty, enact the necessary legislation to extend to the Hawaiian Islands the laws of the United States respecting duties upon imports, the internal revenue, commerce and navigation; but until Congress shall otherwise provide, the existing commercial relations of the Hawaiian Islands both with the United States and foreign countries shall continue as regards the commerce of said islands with the rest of the United States and with foreign countries.' In that treaty, notwithstanding the absolute cession, it was explicitly provided that the existing customs laws should continue in force until Congress should extend to the island the customs and commercial laws of the United States. Mr. Justice WHITE. I understand that your legal contention on the general proposition in the case-your claim is, that this treaty, in effect, amounted to this, for the purpose of the argument: That if a treaty of cession should be made and the treaty should contain a stipulation, "This property is ceded to the United States, subject, however, to the condition that the laws and government of the United States shall not apply or take effect until two years from this date"-therefore you claim that before the two years-even under whatever view may be taken of the questions-the power of the United States would not extend there? The SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Under the resolution of annexation? The SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Exactly; that there should be a period of preparation, of time in which to adjust matters and put in force our Jaws. And that's a very proper condition. Mr. Justice WHITE. You contend that even under the view of the other side as to the local regulations, that was a suspensive condition? The SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Yes; with regard to the feature mentioned, the customs and commercial laws. |