Images of Old Hawaiʻi

  • Home
  • About
  • Archive
    • Ali’i / Chiefs / Governance
    • Buildings
    • Economy
    • Missionaries / Churches / Religious Buildings
    • General
    • Hawaiian Traditions
    • Military
    • Place Names
    • Prominent People
    • Schools
    • Sailing, Shipping & Shipwrecks
  • Contact
  • Subscribe

July 22, 2018 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

1820 v. 1848

“Much has been published respecting the effects of Christianity and civilization upon the natives of these Islands. While the religious and philanthropic portion of the community see abundant cause of congratulation in the results produced by christian philanthropy …”

“… others there are who profess to believe that the Hawaiian race are at the present day in a worse physical and moral condition than they were previous to the introduction of Christianity.”

“If the Hawaiian race are in a worse physical and moral condition than they were twenty-eight years ago, the command ‘Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every living creature,’ is no longer binding upon mankind; for it would be absurd to suppose on all-wise Creator would require the promulgation of doctrines calculated to degrade his creatures.”

“We can hardly believe any candid man, at all acquainted with the condition of the natives or these islands, sincerely thinks their physical and moral state worse now than it was previous to the introduction of christianity.”

“Most of those who have espoused this side of the question, may be numbered among transient visitors, who have had but few opportunities for observation, and who possess no knowledge of the former condition of the people.”

“On the one hand, the friends of Christianity have, in some cases, over rated the advances made, on the other, sweeping assertions have been made which the least attention to the subject would have shown utterly groundless.”

“While it may be safely asserted that no nation or people have made so great progress in civilization during the same period of time as the Hawaiians during the last quarter of a century …”

“… it must be borne in mind that a wide difference still exists between the condition of this people and the inhabitants of those countries which have enjoyed the benefits of civilization and Christianity for centuries.”

“The proportion of those who read and write already exceeds that of many other countries, while the proportion of practical business knowledge and enterprise falls far short.” Polynesian, August 5, 1848

The following are portions of remarks from Asa Thurston (printed in the Polynesian) on the changes which have taken place in the Islands, looking back over 28-years from 1820, to 1848 0 the first 28-years of the Hawaiian Mission.

“In regard to the changes which have taken place in these islands, since the arrival of the first Missionaries, many things might be said. Many things have been said and written, and various opinions entertained and expressed by different persons.”

“Some have regarded them as affording evidence of a better state of things than formerly existed here, and as indicating some advancement in civilization and general improvement …”

“… while others have stated that the people are in a worse condition in many respect now than they were formerly; or before the publication of the gospel, and before these was any written language, or any books printed, or schools established, and the people taught to read …”

“… in fact, that they are more degraded now than when they were worshipping idols. Many statements of the like nature have been made and are still circulated. We envy not the reputation of a man for soundness of intellect, or goodness of heart, who could give currency to such reports.”

“Could the generation of 1820 be placed side-by-side with the present generation (1848), the contrast in their outward appearance would be very striking, scarcely a feature of that generation would be discernable in this. They would not be recognised as belonging to the same race.”

“(Previously), none of the relations of domestic, or social life, were regarded as sacred or binding. A man might have as many wives as he could take care of or feed; or he could turn them all adrift, as best suited convenience or pleasure.”

“A woman also might have as many husbands as she could conveniently entertain, but she could turn them off and take others at pleasure; and they might leave her if they so desired. Poligamy was one the privileges and features of that age.”

“The king had only five wives; one of them was the widow, and two of them were the daughters of his deceased father. Each one had a particular day of service, when she followed her lord with a spittoon and fly-brush.”

“It is easy to see that in such circumstances, there could no such thing as conjugal affection, or domestic concord and there was no such thing as parental authority, and parental affection was rarely to be seen and filial affection and obedience were equally unknown.”

“There were no statute laws, which defined the duties of parents towards children and of children towards parents; children some times regarded parental commands, if they were quite at leisure, and only so far as suited their convenience.”

“No obligations were felt on the part of parents to take care of their children, nor on the part of children to obey their parents, especially mothers, often destroyed their children, before or after birth, in order to be released from the trouble of taking care of them. Such are a few of the facts which belonged to the generation of 1820.”

“The present generation stands in a very different position in these respects. The facts are altogether of a different character. There scarcely a feature of that generation discernible at present, in respect to their social habits and domestic arrangements.”

“Then there was no law, nothing to regulate society. Now, all the natural, social and domestic relations are respected, and the duties of each in some measure, defined and regulated by good and wholesome laws, and any neglect to perform the duties attached to these various relations, is punishable by fine, imprisonment, and other disabilities.”

“Parents and children, husbands and wives, masters and servants, and most of the relations of a civilized life are recognized in law; and for any delinquency in the performance of the respective duties of these relations, they are amenable to the laws of the land. Any breach of promise, any neglect of any does not pass unnoticed.”

“At that period also, there was but one ruler. His word was law. Life and death were at his disposal. The people had no voice in the government, they had no rights that were respected, and they could have no property that might not be seized.”

“A field of taro, or other food might be tabooed at any time, by the chief or landholder, by placing a stick of sugar cane in one corner, and no one would dare to take any of the food afterward, without liberty from the land-holder.”

“Every other kind of property was equally liable to seizure, and if a man refused to execute any of the orders; or neglected to perform any service required by a chief or head man, his house might be burned, with all its contents, and he and his family, left entirely destitute.”

“In short, the people were ruled with a rod of iron. The government was despotic, and the people were allowed no right, they had nothing which they could call their own. They were ignorant, degraded, miserable and destitute.”

“There was no written language – no books – no schools … Every foreign ship was fully freighted with females as she passed from island to island, and there was no want of a supply when in port.”

“From that period (1820) we date the commencement and progress of religious truth. For a few of the first years of missionary effort, the effects of their labor was hardly discernable, but as years rolled on, the onward march of light and truth became more distinctly marked, and now, all who are competent to judge, are ready to exclaim, ‘What hath God wrought?’”

“Many more facts might be stated in favor of the progress which the Hawaiian have made in civilized habit. They practise many of the arts and usages of civilized life.”

“But why should we multiply examples in proof of the advanced, civilized position in which the nation now stands. Every eye can see it, and the great and commanding facts which go to complete the proof of its advancement are not of difficult discovery.”

“They are distinctly marked upon the map of its progress from downright, naked heathenism to its present decently attired civilization. Why, may we ask, has the Hawaiian people been received into the community of nations?”

“Would the American, English and French government have acknowledged the independence of the Hawaiian people, had not its government, its laws, its institutions, civil and religious, commanded respect?” (Asa Thurston; Polynesian, August 5, 1848)

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook 

Follow Peter T Young on Google+ 

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn  

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

© 2018 Hoʻokuleana LLC

Na Mokupuni O Hawaii Nei-Kalama 1837
Na Mokupuni O Hawaii Nei-Kalama 1837

 

Filed Under: Ali'i / Chiefs / Governance, General, Hawaiian Traditions, Missionaries / Churches / Religious Buildings Tagged With: 1820, 1848, Christianity, Hawaii, Hawaiian Constitution, Laws, Timeline

January 17, 2018 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Overthrow

Some suggest the overthrow of the Hawai‘i constitutional monarchy was neither unexpected nor sudden.

Dissatisfaction with the rule of Kalākaua and Lili‘uokalani initially led to the ‘Bayonet Constitution,’ then, the overthrow. “(M)ounting dissatisfaction with government policies and private acts of officials led to the formation of the Hawaiian League, a group of Honolulu businessmen.” (Forbes)

Challenges with Kalākaua
• Polynesian Confederacy
• “(Gibson) discerned but little difficulty in the way of organizing such a political union, over which Kalākaua would be the logical emperor, and the Premier of an almost boundless empire of Polynesian archipelagoes.” (Daggett; Pacific Commercial Advertiser, February 6, 1900)

Opium License Bribery Case
• Initially the king, through his minister of foreign affairs, disclaimed any involvement. However, “To cap the climax of the opium matter, the Attorney General proceeds to acknowledge that the money was paid over by the Chinese … (H)e informed the gentlemen interested in getting the money back that he would never accomplish his object so long as he allowed the newspaper to speak of the affair.” (Hawaiian Gazette, May 17, 1887)

Extravagance/Debt
• Although Kalākaua had been elected and serving as King since 1874, upon returning from a trip around the world (1881), it was determined that Hawaiʻi’s King should also be properly crowned.
• “ʻIolani Palace, the new building of that name, had been completed the previous year (1882), and a large pavilion had been erected immediately in front of it for the celebration of the coronation. This was exclusively for the accommodation of the royal family; but there was adjacent thereto a sort of amphitheatre, capable of holding ten thousand persons, intended for the occupation of the people.” (Liliʻuokalani)

Bayonet Constitution (1887)
• In 1887, the struggle for control of Hawaiʻi was at its height with David Kalākaua on the throne. But some of the businessmen were distrustful of him. “So the mercantile element, as embodied in the Chamber of Commerce, the sugar planters, and the proprietors of the ‘missionary’ stores, formed a distinct political party, called the ‘down-town’ party, whose purpose was to minimize or entirely subvert other interests, and especially the prerogatives of the crown, which, based upon ancient custom and the authority of the island chiefs, were the sole guaranty of our nationality.” (Liliʻuokalani)

Concern with Lili‘uokalani’s Attempt to Rewrite the Constitution
• “When Lili‘uokalani became Queen, she took the following oath: ‘I solemnly swear in the presence of Almighty God, to maintain the Constitution of the Kingdom whole and inviolate, and to govern in conformity therewith.’” (UH Law School)
• “On January 14, 1893, Lili‘uokalani was prepared to ignore the constitutionally mandated approval-by-two-successive Legislatures process for amending the 1887 Constitution by announcing a new constitution in place of Kalākaua’s 1887 Constitution.” (UH Law School)
• “She did not do so because the Cabinet she appointed on January 13, 1893, refused her authorization request. The members of that Cabinet were Samuel Parker, William Henry Cornwell, Jr,, Arthur P. Peterson and John Colburn. Parker was a Native Hawaiian.” (UH Law School)

Some Native Hawaiian Dissatisfaction with the Acts of Kalākaua and Lili‘uokalani
• Robert W Wilcox – the man who figured so prominently & conspicuously in the revolution of 1889 (All quotes from Wilcox, Morgan Report)
o “Queen Lili‘uokalani brought these evils upon herself and the country both by her personal corruption, and that of her Government.”
o “I believe that if we can be annexed to the United States, the rights of all of our citizens, and especially those of the native Hawaiians, will be protected more carefully than they have ever been under the monarchy.”
o “They are naturally somewhat prejudiced against (the Provisional Government), as monarchy is the only form of Government with which they are familiar, but this feeling will quickly wear away as the Hawaiians are led to see that the Government is friendly to them and their interests. They already have confidence in the integrity and patriotism of President Dole.
o “I have repeatedly (advocated annexation to the United States) in public meetings held in this city. … but I am compelled to move cautiously or I shall lose my influence over them. I believe I am doing a good work by constantly conversing with them on the subject.”
o “I have told my countrymen that the monarchy is gone forever, and when they ask me what is the best thing to follow it I tell them annexation, and I firmly believe that in a very short time every Hawaiian will be in favor of that step.” (Robert W Wilcox – the man who figured so prominently & conspicuously in the revolution of 1889; Morgan Report)

Repeated Changes in Cabinet Ministers in the Kalākaua and Lili‘uokalani Reigns
• “Under every constitution prior to 1887 the ministers were appointed by the King and removed by him; but until Kalākaua’s reign it was a very rare thing that any King changed his ministry. They had a pretty long lease of political life.” (Judd; Blount Report)
• “It was a very rare political occurrence, and made a great sensation when a change was made.” (Judd; Blount Report) if

January 14, 1893 Lili‘uokalani’s Ministers Refused to Support Her Constitution – Threats of Bloodshed were Made Against Her Cabinet Ministers
• “The Queen retired to the blue room and summoned the ministers (Samuel Parker – Minister of Foreign Affairs; John F Colburn – Minister of Interior; William H Crowell – Minister of Finance; Arthur P Peterson – Attorney General) who repaired at once to the palace. The Queen was at a table, still dressed in the magnificent costume of the morning, and sparkling in a coronet of diamonds.”
• “She at once presented them with the draft of the new constitution, demanded their signatures, and declared her intention to promulgate the same at once.”
• “Attorney-general Peterson and Minister of Interior Colburn decidedly refused to do so, and Ministers Cornwell and Parker, though more hesitatingly, joined their colleagues in this refusal.”

The Provisional Government (and subsequent Republic, Territory & State) did not steal the land from the Hawaiian people – Crown Lands Remain in the Public Trust
• Crown and Government Lands, though under the control of changing sovereigns and governments (Kingdom to Provisional Government to Republic to Territory to State,) were in and continue to remain in the ‘public domain’ for the public good.
• US Court of Claims concluded, “The constitution of the Republic of Hawai‘i, as respects the crown lands, provided as follows: ‘That portion of the public domain heretofore known as crown land is hereby declared to have been heretofore, and now to be, the property of the Hawaiian Government …” (Lili‘uokalani v The United States, 1910)
• We now generally refer to the Crown and Government Lands as ‘ceded’ lands. Under the Admission Act, about 1.2-million acres are to “be held by (the) State as a public trust” to promote one or more of five purposes:
o support of the public schools and other public educational institutions
o betterment of the conditions of native Hawaiians (per the Hawaiian Homes Act, 1920)
o development of farm and home ownership on as widespread a basis as possible
o making of public improvements
o provision of lands for public use

The United States does not have to acquire property only through a Treaty of Annexation with a concurring vote by the US Senate.
• Annexation of Hawai‘i to the US was not a hostile takeover, it was something the Republic of Hawai‘i sought. “There was no ‘conquest’ by force in the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands nor ‘holding as conquered territory;’ they (Republic of Hawai‘i) came to the United States in the same way that Florida did, to wit, by voluntary cession”. (Territorial Supreme Court; Albany Law Journal)
• “There is no provision in the Constitution by which the national government is specifically authorized to acquire territory; and only by a great effort of the imagination can the substantive power to do so be found in the terms of any or all of the enumerated powers.” (Legal Issues Raised by Proposed Presidential Proclamation To Extend the Territorial Sea, October 4, 1988)

To read more on the overthrow Click HERE:

http://imagesofoldhawaii.com/wp-content/uploads/Overthrow.pdf

One more correction to the many misconceptions … on January 17, 1893, the Hawai‘i constitutional monarchy was overthrown, not the Hawaiian race.

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook 

Follow Peter T Young on Google+ 

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn  

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

© 2018 Hoʻokuleana LLC

Raising_of_American_flag_at_Iolani_Palace-1898
Raising_of_American_flag_at_Iolani_Palace-1898

Filed Under: Ali'i / Chiefs / Governance, Economy, General, Military, Prominent People Tagged With: Constitutional Government, Constitutional Monarchy, Debt, Extravgance, Hawaiian Citizenship, Hawaiian Constitution, Kalakaua, King Kalakaua, Liliuokalani, Opium, Overthrow, Polynesian Confederacy, Queen Liliuokalani

July 25, 2017 by Peter T Young 6 Comments

It’s Not About Race

“When you talk about minorities in Hawaiʻi, you’re talking about everyone. Unlike in most states, no racial or ethnic group constitutes a majority in the Aloha State.” (Time)

In the dawn hours of January 18, 1778, on his third expedition, British explorer Captain James Cook on the HMS Resolution and Captain Charles Clerke of the HMS Discovery first sighted what Cook named the Sandwich Islands (that were later named the Hawaiian Islands.) Hawaiian lives changed with sudden and lasting impact, when western contact changed the course of history for Hawai‘i.

At the time of Cook’s arrival, the Hawaiian Islands were divided into four kingdoms: (1) the island of Hawaiʻi under the rule of Kalaniʻōpuʻu, who also had possession of the Hāna district of east Maui; (2) Maui (except the Hāna district,) Molokai, Lānaʻi and Kahoʻolawe, ruled by Kahekili; (3) Oʻahu, under the rule of Kahahana; and at (4) Kauai and Niʻihau, Kamakahelei was ruler.

In 1782, Kamehameha started his conquest to rule the Islands. After conquering the Island of Hawaiʻi, he moved on to defeat the armies in Maui Nui and concluded his wars on Oʻahu at the Battle of Nuʻuanu in 1795. After failed attempts at conquering Kauaʻi, he negotiated peace with Kaumualiʻi and the Island chain was under his control (1810.)

Providing the Means, as well as Ways to this End, many foreigners (mostly white men) supported Kamehameha, including John Young, Isaac Davis, Don Francisco de Paula Marin, George Beckley and Alexander Adams (and others.)

In April of 1819, Spaniard Don Francisco de Paula Marin was summoned to the Big Island of Hawai‘i to assist Kamehameha, who had become ill. Although he had no formal medical training, Marin had some basic medical knowledge, but was not able to improve the condition of Kamehameha. On May 8, 1819, King Kamehameha I died.

Following the death of Kamehameha I, leadership was passed to his son, Liholiho, who would rule as Kamehameha II. Kaʻahumanu (Kamehameha I’s favorite wife) recruited Liholiho’s mother, Keōpūolani, to join her in convincing Liholiho to break the kapu system which had been the rigid code of Hawaiians for centuries.

“An extraordinary event marked the period of Liholiho’s rule, in the breaking down of the ancient tabus, the doing away with the power of the kahunas to declare tabus and to offer sacrifices, and the abolition of the tabu which forbade eating with women (ʻAi Noa, or free eating.)” (Kamakau)

Kekuaokalani, Liholiho’s cousin, opposed the abolition of the kapu system and assumed the responsibility of leading those who opposed its abolition. These included priests, some courtiers, and the traditional territorial chiefs of the middle rank. Kekuaokalani demanded that Liholiho withdraw his edict on abolition of the kapu system. (Daws)

Kamehameha II refused. After attempts to settle peacefully, “Friendly means have failed; it is for you to act now,” and Keōpūolani then ordered Kalanimōku to prepare for war on Kekuaokalani. Arms and ammunition were given out that evening to everyone who was trained in warfare, and feather capes and helmets distributed. (Kamakau)

In December 1819, just seven months after the death of Kamehameha I, the two powerful cousins engaged at the final Hawaiian battle of Kuamoʻo, on the jagged lava fields south of Keauhou Bay. Liholiho had more men, more weapons and more wealth to ensure his victory. He sent his prime minister, Kalanimōku, to defeat his stubborn cousin.

Kaʻahumanu would rule as an equal with Liholiho and created the office of Kuhina Nui (similar to premier, prime minister or regent.) Kaʻahumanu was, at one time, arguably, the most powerful figure in the Hawaiian Islands, and helped usher in a new era for the Hawaiian kingdom.

She ruled first with Kamehameha II until his departure for England in 1823 (where he died in 1824) and then as regent for Kauikeaouli (Kamehameha III). Kaʻahumanu assumed control of the business of government, including authority over land matters. Kaʻahumanu was such a powerful person and Kuhina Nui that subsequent female Kuhina Nui adopted her name, (Kaʻahumanu II, III & IV.)

Some have suggested it was the missionaries that ended the kapu that disrupted the social/political system in the Islands; that is not true – the missionaries had not even arrived in the Islands, yet. The kapu was abolished by Hawaiians and it affected only Hawaiians.

On April 4, 1820, the Pioneer Company of American Protestant missionaries arrived from the northeast US at Kailua-Kona (after the death of Kamehameha I and the abolition of the kapu by Liholiho, Kaʻahumanu and Keōpūolani.) There were seven American Caucasian couples sent by the ABCFM to convert the Hawaiians to Christianity.

Soon after the first anniversary of their landing at Honolulu on April 19, 1821, Kaʻahumanu, Kalanimōku and Kalākua visited the mission and gave them supplies. This visit became important because during it Kaʻahumanu made her first request for prayer and showed her first interest in the teachings of the missionaries. From that point on, Kaʻahumanu comes into more constant contact with the mission.

On February 11, 1824, Kaʻahumanu made one of her first public speeches on religious questions, giving “plain, serious, close and faithful advice.”

At a meeting of the chiefs and school teachers, Kaʻahumanu and Kalanimōku declared their determination to “adhere to the instructions of the missionaries, to attend to learning, observe the Sabbath, Worship God, and obey his law, and have all their people instructed.” The Hawaiian people followed their native leaders, accepting the missionaries as their new priestly class. (Schulz)

Ka‘ahumanu had requested baptism for Keōpūolani and Keʻeaumoku when they were dying, but she waited until April, 1824, before requesting the same for herself. “She was admitted to the church in 1825, and was baptized by the name of Elizabeth.” (Lucy Thurston)

“Her influence and authority had long been paramount and undisputed with the natives, and was now discreetly used for the benefit of the nation.”

“She visited the whole length and breadth of the Islands, to recommend to her people, attention to schools, and to the doctrines and duties of the word of God, and exerted all her influence to suppress vice, and restrain the evils which threatened the ruin of her nation.” (Lucy Thurston)

The arrival of the first company of American missionaries in Hawai¬ʻi marked the beginning of Hawaiʻi’s phenomenal rise to literacy. The chiefs became proponents for education and edicts were enacted by the King and the council of chiefs to stimulate the people to reading and writing. Missionaries taught, but also taught the Hawaiians to be teachers.

By 1831, in just eleven years from the first arrival of the missionaries, Hawaiians had built 1,103 schoolhouses. This covered every district throughout the eight major islands and serviced an estimated 52,882 students. (Laimana)

In 1839, King Kamehameha III called for the formation of the Chiefs’ Children’s School (Royal School.) The main goal of this school was to groom the next generation of the highest ranking Chiefs’ children and secure their positions for Hawaiʻi’s Kingdom.

The King asked white missionaries Amos Starr Cooke and Juliette Montague Cooke to teach the 16-royal children and run the school. The Hawai‘i sovereigns who reigned over the Hawaiian people from 1855 were educated in this school.

This included, Alexander Liholiho (King Kamehameha IV;) Emma Naʻea Rooke (Queen Emma;) Lot Kapuāiwa (King Kamehameha V;) William Lunalilo (King Lunalilo;) Bernice Pauahi (Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop, founder of Kamehameha Schools;) David Kalākaua (King Kalākaua) and Lydia Liliʻu Kamakaʻeha (Queen Liliʻuokalani.)

Interestingly, these same early missionaries taught their lessons in Hawaiian, rather than English. In part, the mission did not want to create a separate caste and portion of the community as English-speaking Hawaiians.

Kamehameha III asked missionary William Richards (who had previously been asked to serve as Queen Keōpūolani’s religious teacher) to become an advisor to the King as instructor in law, political economy and the administration of affairs generally.

Betsey Stockton served with Richards at Lāhainā; she was an African American missionary who was part of the American mission, and the only single woman missionary to the Islands.

Richards gave classes to King Kamehameha III and his Chiefs on the Western ideas of rule of law and economics. His decision to assist the King ultimately resulted in his resignation from the mission, when the ABCFM board refused to allow him to belong to the mission while assisting the King.

“The Hawaiian people believed in William Richards, the foreigner who taught the king to change the government of the Hawaiian people to a constitutional monarchy and end that of a supreme ruler, and his views were adopted.” (Kamakau)

Of his own free will, King Kamehameha III granted the Constitution of 1840, as a benefit to his country and people, that established his Government upon a declared plan. (Rex v. Booth – Hanifin)

That constitution introduced the innovation of representatives chosen by the people (rather than, as previously, solely selected by the Aliʻi.) This gave the common people a share in the government’s actual political power for the first time. Hawaiʻi was not a race-based constitutional monarchy – Hawaiian citizens were from varying ethnicities.

Today, there remain ongoing claims and discussions about restoring the Hawaiian Government that was deposed on January 17, 1893 and replaced by the Provisional Government of Hawaiʻi, later the Republic of Hawaiʻi, then annexation and statehood.

Some suggest that “American white supremacist racists” overthrew the constitutional monarchy and initiated a calculated campaign of social, cultural and spiritual genocide.

On January 16, 1893, the Committee of Safety wrote a letter to John L Stevens, American Minister, that stated: “We, the undersigned citizens and residents of Honolulu, respectfully represent that, in view of recent public events in this Kingdom, culminating in the revolutionary acts of Queen Liliʻuokalani on Saturday last, the public safety is menaced and lives and property are in peril, and we appeal to you and the United States forces at your command for assistance.” (Pacific Commercial Advertiser, January 17, 1893)

The Committee of Safety, formally the Citizen’s Committee of Public Safety, was a 13-member group also known as the Annexation Club; they started in 1887 as the Hawaiian League.

The Committee of Safety was made up of 6-Hawaiian citizens (3-by birth and 3 naturalized (1-former American, 1-former German & 1-former Tasmanian;)) 5-Americans, 1-Scotsman and 1-German.

Most were not American, and, BTW, none were missionaries and only 3 had missionary family ties – the Missionary Period ended in 1863, a generation before the overthrow. I am not sure where the evidence is that they were racist, or what the details were for the ‘calculated campaign.’

Some suggest the make-up of the 1901 Legislature (the first Legislature in the Territory of Hawai‘i) as an example of racial tensions and concern for lack of racial representation of the people.

In 1900, the Kanaka Maoli (aboriginal Hawaiians) had formed their own political party, called the Home Rule Party, through merging two organizations, Hui Aloha ‘Āina and Hui Kālai‘āina, who had worked together to support Queen Lili‘uokalani and oppose annexation. (Silva)

That year, the Home Rulers elected Robert Wilcox as Hawaiʻi’s first delegate to the US Congress. (However, on July 10, 1902, Prince Kūhiō split from the Home Rule Party, joined the Republican Party and won the Congressional seat in the election on November 4, 1902.)

Some suggest the early Legislative elections and party affiliations were based on race (Home Rule for Hawaiians and Republicans for whites.) However, it’s interesting to note that in 1901, 1903 and 1905 there was successive decline in representation by Home Rule candidates in the Legislature, although there continued to be a total of around 30-Hawaiians (out of 45) in the Legislature.

The next election (1907,) there was only 1-Home Rule party member serving in the Senate, and none in the House; however, a total of 32-Hawaiians were in the Legislature; there were more Hawaiians in the Legislature then, than that first 1901 session. With Republicans dominating both chambers, it is clear that most of the Hawaiians were Republicans. (While the Home Rule Party was race-based, the Republican Party was not.)

It is evident that native Hawaiians did not need the ‘Home Rule’ race-based political party to get representation in the local or national legislatures. After a decade of election losses, the Home Rule Party was disbanded after the elections of 1912.

However, Hawaiian representation in the Legislature continued to be just under 30 – out of a total of 45 (15-Senators and 30-Representatives.) (Report of Secretary of the Interior)

Since ‘contact,’ Hawaiians (especially Hawaiian Aliʻi and Chiefs) had partnered and collaborated with the white foreigners. Kamehameha was successful because of his collaboration with the white foreigners.

Over the years, the growing partnership and collaboration between native Hawaiians and the American Protestant missionaries resulted in the introduction of Christianity, a written Hawaiian language, literacy, constitutional government, Western medicine and an evolving music tradition.

Today, “White residents make up just a quarter of the population — the lowest proportion in the country (which is 66% white overall, according to US Census figures.) Nearly 40% of Hawaiians are classified as Asian, with an additional 9% native Hawaiian. … Hawaii (is) a place where ‘racial and ethnic lines are often blurred or deemed irrelevant.’” (Time)

Our forefathers of different races got along fine; I am not sure what the benefit (or goal) is with repeated slurs and racial rants, today. The Hawaiian nation was overthrown … not the Hawaiian race (it was a constitutional monarchy, not race-limited.)

By international practice and laws, as well as the specific laws and practice of the Hawaiian Kingdom, Hawaiian citizenship in the constitutional monarchy included people of other races (not just native Hawaiians.) Their descendants carry the same right to citizenship as the native Hawaiians.

Yet, to date, apparently, the only people permitted to exercise their rights related to discussions on restoration, reparation, sovereignty, independence, etc related to the Hawaiian nation have been those of one race, the native Hawaiians.

All Hawaiian citizens lost their nation in 1893 … Hawaiian citizens with their varying ethnicities, not just those who descend from those who lived in the Islands prior to 1778.

Why aren’t all Hawaiian citizens included in the recognition and sovereignty discussions and decisions today? And, why don’t people stop the racial focus, name-calling and racial rants (and other inappropriate distractions), and start working together?

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook 

Follow Peter T Young on Google+ 

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn  

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

© 2017 Hoʻokuleana LLC

Hawaiian-Islands-NASA1

Filed Under: Ali'i / Chiefs / Governance, Economy, General, Missionaries / Churches / Religious Buildings, Prominent People Tagged With: Christianity, Constitutional Monarchy, Education, Hawaii, Hawaiian Citizenship, Hawaiian Constitution, Literacy, Medicine, Music, Nationality, Race, Sovereignty

June 10, 2017 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Prior to the Hawaiian Constitution

Collaboration between Ali‘i and the American Protestant missionaries resulted in, among other things, the introduction of Christianity, the creation of the Hawaiian written language, widespread literacy, making Western medicine available, and the evolution of a new and distinctive musical tradition with harmony and choral singing.

In addition, the missionaries collaborated with the Chiefs on the promulgation of a constitutional government. William Richards, a member of the Second Company of American Protestant missionaries was instrumental in transforming Hawaiian governance, through a constitution with individual rights.

In a March 15, 1841 letter from Richards to Captain Charles Wilkes, he gives his general observations on Hawaiian culture and description of economic and political conditions leading up to Declaration of Rights (1839) and Hawai‘i’s first constitution (1840.) The following are excerpts from that letter:

“As far as there was a regular government it was mainly of a feodal character and vested in the various ranks of landlords from the king down. The power of each particular lord was generally supreme or nearly so, over his own vassals, nor was that power entirely confined to personal dependants.”

“There was so much politeness, or respect, or fear, whatever it might be called, existing between the different chiefs, that any one chief might call on the dependants without much danger of giving offence.”

“Thus the people were often compelled to serve many masters, and often too out of the regular line of landlords landholders &c …. As a general thing however each chief had his particular lands, & tenants, and agents and servants, and ruled his own little kingdom according to his own laws, being himself however entirely subject to his superior, as his own agents were to him.”

“Civil rights were very little respected, nor were they scarcely known to exist. There were some general rules however a kind of common law, which when violated, the offender was often and perhaps generally punished, particularly if the crime was of an aggravated kind.”

“Kamehameha I in repeated instances punished murder by death. Grand larceny was a capitol offence if the injured person had power to execute what was considered to be law, and the chiefs and even the king not unfrequently espoused the cause of the injured party, and inflicted punishment for flagrant crimes.”

“As far as there was any real system to the government, it was deeply interwoven with their religious tabus, as well as with their feodal tenures, and a full account of the government therefore, would embrace an entire history of the tabu & also of the feudal system.”

“From the earliest periods of Hawaiian history, it appears that the tenure by which the lands have been held has in most respects been feodal, and the origin of the feuds was nearly the same as among the Goths, the Huns, the Vandals, and other northern nations of Europe.”

“A chieftain who could collect a sufficient number of followers to conquer a district or an Island, as soon as he had accomplished his object collected his victorious army about him for the purpose of dividing the spoil, or what they called ‘Cutting up the lands.’”

“The leader or king took his choice among the best of the lands, and on these lands placed some of his own particular servants, as agents to superintend the cultivation for himself.”

“The originall tenants who were on the farms at the time they were seized by the invading army usually remained under the new conquerers, at least many or most of them, and by these the land was cultivated for the king under such new agents as he saw fit to appoint.”

“After the king had taken his choice, he then divided out the whole conquered territory among the leaders of his army, giving the most valuable portions to those who had acted the most distinguished part.”

“In doing this, the king had full opportunity to show his skill & wisdom, for it was no easy task to give satisfaction in the division of the lands. Before the work was finished, difficulties often arose, and not unfrequently rebellions and new wars.”

“Every receiver of lands or feudatory was bound to his particular benefactor in the same manner as the first ranks were to the king, and thus a perfect feodal connexion was established between the king and his lowest subject through the various ranks of lords and tenants.”

“By this means, the chiefs secured and retained their authority over the people—and the rich over the poor. The authority and controll was almost perfect. It was the only system of governing with which the Hawaiians have been acquainted, and even to the present day, it is next to impossible to convince the elder chiefs that authority and subordinations can be maintained by any other means.”

“An old chief said to me, ‘If we can not take away their lands, what will they care for us? They will be as rich as we.’”

“The consequence of this system was that the common laborers did not themselves receive probably on an average more than one third of the avails of their labors, while the different orders of chiefs received the remaining two thirds.”

“The great amount however taken by the superiors was not the worst feature of this oppressive system. The remaining one third was not safe. Or rather there was no distinct dividing line by which the tenent might know and hold his own.”

“If a man by uncommon industry, brought his farm to a higher state of cultivation than his neighbor, he was not thereby sure of having more for his own use, and he could not distinctly lay his hand on any article of value and say that was his own.”

“But notwithstanding all these advantages which the superiors enjoyed over their inferiors, yet favoritism, jealousy, but more than all natural fickleness of character were so universal, that no landholder considered himself safe in his possessions, and therefore even ridiculed the idea of making extensive improvements.”

“So insecure did the people feel themselves to be in the possession of their lands, that the more reflecting class always tried to obtain and often did obtain a small division under different chiefs, so that when they were dispossessed of one, they might be saved from starvation by the produce of the other.”

“There were however customs, rules, and an acknowledged propriety of conduct in relation to taxation and dispossessions of lands. But there being no fixed law, nor courts of justice, or source of appeal, the people were in effect tenants at will, each particular class to their direct landlords.”

“And what was more, it was usually the case that when a man was dispossessed of his lands, he was usually dispossessed of most, if not all of his personal estate which had been acquired either directly or indirectly from the lands he had possessed.”

“The greatest changes took place at the death of the landlords, when the right to the feuds descended to their heirs. These heirs almost as a matter of course would have a different class of favorites from their predecessors, and therefore would dispossess the old tenants, and put their personal favorites in their places.”

“When the king deceased, great changes in every part of his dominions was the consequence. If a chief either of higher or lower rank deceased, then all the estates in his particular feoffment, and those only, were affected.”

“But among all the better classes it was considered improper to eject the direct cultivaters of the land and hence it was often the case that all the different ranks of chiefs were dispossessed, while the last dependants, the cultivaters of the soil, were continued in their possessions. Had this always been the case it would have greatly mitigated the evils of the system.”

“This feodal tenure under the present system of government has not entirely ceased to exist, but it is greatly modified. Indeed in principle it has nearly ceased, but in practice it continues to a very considerable extent.”

“The new laws define the rights of the different classes, and prescribe the rules by which each class shall be governed. Officers are also appointed to see that the rules are observed, and assess damages according (to) law where the rights of one class are invaded by the people of another class.”

“No tax whatever can be laid and no property seized, not even by the king, except by express provision of law. No landlord can disposs(ess) his tenants of their fiefs for the right of the tenants is declared perpetual.”

“The tenure therefore by which the lands are now held may be considered that of perpetual lease, subject to forfeiture for non payment of rent, the amount of which is regulated by laws in which the people have a voice and no new tax can be laid without the assent of their representatives.”

“The principle evils which no[w] remain to weaken the tenure by which lands are held, are the ignorance of the officers of the new system, and their fear of acting against the interests of chiefs and persons of rank. These evils however are fast diminishing.”

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook 

Follow Peter T Young on Google+ 

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn  

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

© 2017 Hoʻokuleana LLC

Miloli‘i Valley, showing two grass-thatched houses-19th_century-(Carpenter)
Miloli‘i Valley, showing two grass-thatched houses-19th_century-(Carpenter)

Filed Under: Ali'i / Chiefs / Governance Tagged With: Governance, Hawaii, Hawaiian Constitution

April 27, 2017 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

William Richards

William Richards, the seventh child and third son of James and Lydia (Shaw) Richards, was born at Plainfield, Massachusetts, August 22, 1793.

His grandparents were Joseph and Sarah (Whitmarsh) Richards, and Captain Ebenezer and Ann (Molson) Shaw. The Richards family is descended from William Richards, who came to Plymouth before 1633, and ultimately settled in Weymouth, Massachusetts.

William’s father was a farmer, but was also a teacher and held many public offices. His mother is described as a most excellent woman. The parents gave to their children the best of pious instruction.

William was a younger brother of James Richards, Jr. In the summer of 1806, in a grove of trees, in what was then known as Sloan’s Meadow at Williams College, James Richards, Samuel John Mills, Francis L Robbins, Harvey Loomis and Byram Green debated the theology of missionary service.

Their meeting was interrupted by a thunderstorm and they took shelter under a haystack until the sky cleared. That event has since been referred to as the “Haystack Prayer Meeting” and is viewed by many as the pivotal event for the development of Protestant missions in the subsequent decades and century and catalyst to formation of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Mission (ABCFM.)

At the age of fifteen, William became hopefully pious, and three years later he united with the church in his native place, under the care of the Rev. Moses Hallock.

His desire to become a missionary was, probably, awakened by his older brother, who, about the time of his graduation, disclosed his plan for life to the younger brother.

As his brother had done, William entered Williams as a Freshman in 1815. He had as classmates two sons of his pastor, Gerard and William Allen Hallock.

“His intellectual powers were of a high order. When at college, he excelled in mathematics, natural and intellectual philosophy, and logic, while, in the languages and belles lettres, he scarcely rose above the common average.” (Gerard Hallock; Hewitt, Williams College)

In college he was a member of the Mills Theological Society, and also of the Philotechnian Literary Society, of which he was, for a time, president. He was a superior student, graduating with Phi Beta Kappa rank. At Commencement, he had a Philosophical Oration, the subject of his address being “The Nature and Effects of Dew.”

After graduating in 1819, Richards pursued his theological studies at Andover. In February, 1822, the ABCFM having planned to reinforce the mission at the Sandwich Islands, Richards offered himself for that service and was accepted.

He was ordained in New Haven, Connecticut, on September 12 of the same year, with two other missionaries, the Rev. Dr. Miller of the Princeton Theological Seminary preaching the sermon.

On October 30, 1822, Mr. Richards married Clarissa, daughter of Levi Lyman, of Northampton, Massachusetts. On November 19 he, with his wife, joined the Second Company of American Protestant missionaries to Hawai‘i.

After five months at sea they reached Honolulu on Sunday, April 27, 1823. The missionaries were most cordially welcomed, not only by their future associates, but by several chiefs of the island.

Richards describes his first Hawai‘i home, “We are living in houses built by the heathen and presented to us. They are built in native style, and consist of posts driven into the ground …”

“… on which small poles are tied horizontally, and then long grass is fastened to the poles by strings which pass round each bundle. We have no floors, and no windows except holes cut through the thatching, which are closed by shutters without glass.”

In May 1823, Keōpūolani (wife of Kamehameha I and mother of King Kamehameha II & III) and her husband Hoapili expressed a desire to have an instructor connected with them and asked that a Tahitian, Taua, do so.

The mission approved, and Taua resided until the death of Keōpūolani. He proved a faithful teacher, and by the blessing of God, we believe, he did much to establish her in the Christian faith. (Memoir)

Keōpūolani also requested that missionaries accompany her. As Lahaina had been previously selected for a missionary station, the missionaries were happy to commence their labors there under such auspices. Richards and Charles Samuel Stewart therefore accompanied her. (Memoir)

On their passage, she told them she would be their mother; and indeed she acted the part of a mother ever afterwards. Immediately on their arrival, she requested them to commence teaching, and said, also, “It is very proper that my sons (meaning the missionaries) be present with me at morning and evening prayers.”

Soon after landing in Lahaina, Richards wrote: “The field for usefulness here is great; and I have never, for a moment since I arrived, had a single fear that my usefulness on these Islands will be limited by anything but my own imperfections. …”

“It is enough for me, that in looking back I can see clearly that the finger of Providence pointed me to these Islands; and that in looking forward, I see some prospect of success and of lasting usefulness.” (Richards, August 30, 1823; Missionary Herald)

By 1825, there was strong interest in the message of the missionaries. Richards wrote, “As I was walking this evening, I heard the voice of prayer in six different houses, in the course of a few rods. I think there are now not less than fifty houses in Lahaina where the morning and evening sacrifice is regularly offered to the true God.”

“The number is constantly increasing and there is now scarcely an hour in the day that I am not interrupted in my regular employment by calls of persons anxious to know what they must do to be saved.” (Richards; Anderson) In 1831, Richards and Lorrin Andrews helped to build the high school at Lahainaluna on the slopes above Lahaina.

In 1837, after fourteen years of labor, he made a visit to the US, accompanied by his wife and the six oldest children. The health of himself and his wife made such a change desirable, and he wished to provide for the education of his children there.

On his return to his post in the spring of 1838, the king and chiefs, who felt the need of reform in their government, asked Mr. Richards to become their teacher, chaplain and interpreter.

With the consent of the ABCFM, he accepted this position and resigned his appointment as missionary and then spent his time urging the improvement of the political system.

He prepared a book No Ke Kalaiaina, based on Wyland, Elements of Political Economy. This book and Richards interation with the king and chiefs helped shape the initial Hawaiʻi Constitution (1840). (Lots of information here is from Hewitt, Williams College.)\

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook 

Follow Peter T Young on Google+ 

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn  

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

© 2017 Hoʻokuleana LLC

William_Richards
William_Richards

Filed Under: Ali'i / Chiefs / Governance, Missionaries / Churches / Religious Buildings, Prominent People Tagged With: 2nd Company, Elements of Political Economy, Hawaii, Hawaiian Constitution, Missionaries, No Ke Kalaiaina, William Richards

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • Next Page »

Images of Old Hawaiʻi

People, places, and events in Hawaiʻi’s past come alive through text and media in “Images of Old Hawaiʻi.” These posts are informal historic summaries presented for personal, non-commercial, and educational purposes.

Info@Hookuleana.com

Connect with Us

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Recent Posts

  • Pau …
  • Missionary Period
  • Transformation of Waimea, South Kohala, Hawaiʻi
  • St. Andrew’s Priory
  • Kewalo Basin
  • Kamehameha’s Haoles
  • Kolo Wharf

Categories

  • Ali'i / Chiefs / Governance
  • Buildings
  • Economy
  • General
  • Hawaiian Traditions
  • Military
  • Missionaries / Churches / Religious Buildings
  • Place Names
  • Prominent People
  • Sailing, Shipping & Shipwrecks
  • Schools
  • Voyage of the Thaddeus

Tags

American Board of Commissioners of Foreign Missions American Board of Commissioners of Foreign Missions American Protestant Missionaries Bernice Pauahi Bishop Captain Cook Downtown Honolulu Hawaii Hawaii Island Henry Opukahaia Hilo Hiram Bingham Hiram Bingham Honolulu Honolulu Harbor Iolani Palace Kaahumanu Kailua Kailua-Kona Kalakaua Kalanimoku Kamehameha Kamehameha Kamehameha III Kamehameha IV Kauai Kauikeaouli Keopuolani King Kalakaua Kona Lahaina Lahainaluna Lanai Liholiho Liliuokalani Maui Missionaries Oahu Pearl Harbor Punahou Queen Emma Queen Liliuokalani Sugar thevoyageofthethaddeus Volcano Waikiki

Hoʻokuleana LLC

Hoʻokuleana LLC is a Planning and Consulting firm assisting property owners with Land Use Planning efforts, including Environmental Review, Entitlement Process, Permitting, Community Outreach, etc. We are uniquely positioned to assist you in a variety of needs.

Info@Hookuleana.com

Never miss a post

Get future posts straight to your inbox by subscribing below.

Copyright © 2012-2016 Peter T Young, Hoʻokuleana LLC