Peter T Young

September 28, 2026 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Silva’s Stores

Reportedly, the first Portuguese in Hawai’i were sailors that came on the Eleanora in 1790. It is believed the first Portuguese nationals to live in the Hawaiian kingdom sailed through on whalers, as early as 1794, and jumped ship.

The first recorded Portuguese visitor was John Elliot de Castro, who sailed to Hawaiʻi in 1814. During his days in Hawaiʻi he became a retainer of King Kamehameha I, serving as his personal physician and as member of the royal court.

For 50 years after these early visitors arrived, Portuguese sailors came ashore alone or in small groups, jumping ship to enjoy Hawaiian life and turning their backs on the rough life aboard whalers and other vessels.

The reciprocity treaty in 1875 between the Kingdom of Hawaiʻi and the United States opened the US sugar market to Hawaiʻi and greatly increased the demand for workers.

Jacinto Pereira (also known as Jason Perry,) a Portuguese citizen and owner of a dry goods store in Honolulu, suggested in 1876 that Hawaiʻi’s government look for sugar labor from Madeira where farmers were succumbing to a severe economic depression fostered by a blight that decimated vineyards and the wine industry.

São Miguel in the eastern Azores was also chosen as a source of labor. In 1878, the first Portuguese immigrant laborers to Honolulu arrived on the German ship Priscilla. At least one hundred men, women and children arrived to work on the sugar plantations. That year marked the beginning of the mass migration of Portuguese to Hawaiiʻ, which continued until the end of the century.

John Ignacio Silva was born at Ponta Delgada, São Miguel, Azores, Portugal on October 15, 1868, son of Jose Ignacio and Angelica de Jesus (Gomes) Silva.

He reportedly came to the Islands in the early-1880s and began his business career as clerk in store of PA Dias, Kapaʻau, Kohala, 1885-86; clerk, A Enos & Co, Wailuku, Maui, 1887-90; salesman, Gonsalves & Co, on Island of Maui, 1890-93; travelling photographer, Gonsalves and Silva, Honolulu, 1893-94. (Siddall)

He moved to Kauai; the local paper noted, “Copartnership. The undersigned having bought out the general merchandise business of M. Gonsalves, jr., ʻEleʻele, Kauai, will carry on the business under the name of Frias & Silva. Jose De Frias, JI Silva” (Pacific Commercial Advertiser, June 21, 1894) He bought out Frias in 1896; beginning in 1901, he was for many years the postmaster at ʻEleʻele.

He expanded; “JI Silva, the pioneer merchant of ʻEleʻele, has three flourishing establishments, the main, big store being at ʻEleʻele, with branches located at Homestead and at Hanapepe.”

“He formerly had branches at Koloa and Kalihiwai, but on account of the tremendous growth of his ʻEleʻele and other enterprises near home, found that he had not time to properly look after his distant establishments, so closed them up.”

“At ʻEleʻele Mr. Silva carries a very large and complete stock of general merchandise. He has his ‘drummers’ on the road and maintains a very complete auto truck delivery service to great distances.”

“Mr. Silva is general manager of his stores. AM Souza is manager of ʻEleʻele store, John G Abreu of Homestead store, and MR Jardin of the establishment in Hanapepe. Mrs Silva is postmistress at ʻEleʻele, while Mr. Silva is acting postmaster at Homestead.” (The Garden Island, December 22, 1914)

For a short while he was in politics; “Silva knows the political situation of Kauai so well that whatever he says in matters political, will be accepted as final.”

“Silva, while a member of the house of representatives, of the legislature of 1907, was called by his colleagues the ‘red salt’ representative from Kauai. This was due to his presentation to each member of the house of a small bag of red salt, brought from his place at ʻEleʻele.” (The Garden Island, September 8, 1914)

His operation was a success, “A little further on, ’round the corner, we discovered the ʻEleʻele Store, Kauai’s ‘Temple of Fashion,’ the largest private commercial house on Kauai, and which is owned by Hon JI Silva.”

“The nature of the proprietor of this very prosperous looking institution is evidence by the fact that he is the only manager to use the gasoline truck for delivery purposes on the island – having recently purchased a Buick from the Kauai Garage Co.”

“It required but a very short interview with the genial manager to acquaint us with the secret of his success. Up to date window dressing is a feature of this attractive store which enjoys a large patronage from the surrounding community.” (The Garden Island, July 25, 1911)

All seemed to go well; until, “Notice is hereby given that John I. Silva, doing a general merchandise business at ʻEleʻele, Island of Kauai, Territory of Hawaiʻi, under the name of ‘ʻEleʻele Store,’ has this day assigned all of his property – to the undersigned for the benefit of his creditors.”

“All creditors of the above named John I. Silva and all persons having claims against him will present same, duly authenticated and with proper vouchers, if any exist, to the undersigned, at said ʻEleʻele Store, within sixty (60) days from the date thereof, otherwise they will be forever barred. Dated March 17th, 1922. Theo H Davies & Company, Ltd, Assignee for the benefit of the creditors of John I. Silva. (The Garden Island, March 21, 1922)

J. I. Silva Homestead Store, Kauai-PPWD-14-3-003-(1900)

September 27, 2026 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Jones Act

It’s called the Merchant Marine Act of 1920. The Act was introduced by Senator Wesley Jones from Washington, and thus carried his name.

The Jones Act is part of the post-World War I years, when the vulnerability of US shipping to German U-boats was still fresh in the public’s mind, to maintain a “dependable” merchant fleet for the next “national emergency” – as well as promote US shipping interests. (WSJ)

Part of the act deals with ‘coastwise (or domestic) trade’ – essentially the term applies to a voyage beginning at any point within the US and delivering a type of commercial cargo to any other point within the US. (Maritime Law Center)

Another related term is ‘cabotage’ – this initially referred to shipping along coastal routes, port to port; now it is defined as the “transportation of passengers and goods within the same country” and “law or policy protecting transporters of passengers and goods within a country from competition from foreign carriers.” (American Heritage Dictionary)

The threshold question here is whether the carriage involves a move of an item of “merchandise” from one coastwise point to another when any part of the journey by sea or by land and sea occurs by vessel. If so, the movement is coastwise trade.

Merchandise is essentially any object, whether valuable or not, whether privately owned or owned by the US Government or by a state government or subdivision thereof, other than the carrying vessel’s own equipment and consumable supplies. (King)

The Jones Act was designed to protect the domestic shipping industry. It states that only ships made in the US and flying the country’s flags can deliver goods between US ports.

That means that a cargo ship filled with goods from China can only make one stop in the US at a time. It can’t stop in Hawaii to exchange goods before heading to Los Angeles. (Bussewitz)

This limitation is not new. After passage of the Constitution in 1789, the First Congress promptly exercised the sovereign powers of the US to protect the US merchant marine fleet from foreign flag competition in its domestic maritime trades.

The new Congress imposed a tax on foreign vessels operating in the domestic trades at a rate that, as a practical matter, precluded them from competing with the domestic merchant marine in those trades. Then, in 1817, Congress expressly prohibited foreign vessels from operating in the coastwise trades.

From 1817 to 1866, the US maritime cabotage laws prohibited the transportation of merchandise “from one port of the United States to another port of the United States in a vessel belonging wholly or in part to a subject of any foreign power.” (McGeorge)

The Jones Act revamped the US shipping laws governing cabotage, ship mortgages, seamen’s personal injury claims and more in the immediate aftermath of World War I. (King)

However, the bulk of the discussion on the Act deals with coastwise trade and cabotage and the fact that the law requires that all goods traded between US ports be transported by US-owned, US-built, US-flagged and at least 75 percent US-crewed ships. (Wilson)

The US is not alone in establishing and enforcing cabotage laws. Most trading nations of the world, according to Department of Transportation’s Maritime Administration (MARAD,) have or have had cabotage laws of some kind. (GAO)

But folks now-a-days, especially in the Islands, are suggesting the Act is inhibiting free trade – which results in higher prices for shipping (adding to the cost of almost everything we buy in the Islands.)

According to a 2014 report by the Congressional Research Service, the cost of a US-manufactured ship is about four times that of foreign competition, and crew costs for “Jones Act–eligible” vessels are several times higher than foreign counterparts. These higher operating costs make shipping between US ports as much as three times the rate of shipping to a foreign port. (Wilson)

The “significant measurable US import restraint on services is in the transportation sector. Complete liberalization of oceanborne domestic water transport (i.e. repeal of the Jones Act) results in a $656 million net welfare gain ….”

“More conservative estimates of foreign-cost advantages under free-trade conditions change the model results, showing significantly less import penetration in the US market and smaller welfare gains. Relaxing the domestic construction requirement alone is estimated to generate $261 million in net welfare gains …” (US International Trade Commission, 2002)

Another way to say the above is that “repealing the Jones Act would lower shipping costs by about 22 percent.” (Congressional Record)

By shutting out foreign competition, the law limits shipping capacity and inflates US freight rates. Like most forms of protectionism, it benefits a few (primarily labor unions and US shipbuilders) to the detriment of many.

US islands, such as Hawaiʻi (along with the state of Alaska,) feel the effects of the Jones Act more than most localities. (Bloomberg)

Jones Act waivers were granted during Hurricane Katrina due to the significant disruption in the production and transportation of petroleum and/or refined petroleum products in the region during that emergency and the impact this had on national defense. (USCG)

Some suggest waivers are evidence of the negative impacts of the law, but also say ending the Jones Act shouldn’t be a unilateral move. Dozens of other nations have similar protectionist laws, and the US should only allow competition from ships that are registered to nations that agree to reciprocal rollbacks. (Bloomberg)

September 26, 2026 by Peter T Young 1 Comment

Lady in Waiting

Captain Henry Blanchard, master of the brig Thaddeus (that brought the Pioneer Company of missionaries to the Islands in 1820,) married a Molokai chiefess named Koloa. They had a daughter, Harriet, born in 1831.

Harriet married an itinerant English actor, John Townsend, whose dramatic company performed in Honolulu. He gave up acting and invested in a sugar plantation (that went bankrupt.) Then he disappeared, leaving Harriet with their two children Eveline (Kittie) and George.

Eveline Melita Townsend joined Kawaiahaʻo Church, where she sang in the church choir, led by then-Princess (later-Queen) Liliʻuokalani. Liliʻuokalani must have been charmed by her exuberant and fatherless choir member, for Eveline became a protégé of the princess and later an intimate friend. (Krauss)

“(Kittie) professed a great fondness and love for me, and with two other young ladies, Lizzie Kapoli and Sophie Sheldon, had made my home theirs. Bright young girls, with happy hearts, and free from care and trouble, they made that part of my life a most delightful epoch to me.”

“It was then that Mr (Charles Burnett (CB)) Wilson first sought the hand of pretty little Kittie Townsend. Thus we had known Mr Wilson quite well as a young man when he was courting his wife.”

“My husband and myself had warmly favored his suit; and, with his wife, he naturally became a retainer of the household, and from time to time they took up their residence with us.” (Liliʻuokalani)

The Wilsons had a son, Johnny. CB Wilson was appointed Marshal of the Kingdom.

“One evening, shortly after Mr and Mrs Wilson had moved into the bungalow, he presented himself at the Blue Room of the palace, and then first mentioned the idea that a new constitution should be promulgated. … About two days’ after this suggestion I received a call from Mr. Samuel Nowlein, who alluded to the same matter.”

“On the sixteenth day of January. 1895. Deputy Marshal Arthur Brown and Captain Robert Waipa Parker were seen coming up the walk which leads from Beretania Street to my residence.”

“Mrs Wilson told me that they were approaching. I directed her to show them into the parlor, where I soon joined them. Mr. Brown informed me that he had come to serve a warrant for my arrest; he would not permit me to take the paper which he held, nor to examine its contents.”

“(W)e arrived at the gates of ʻIolani Palace, the residence of the Hawaiian sovereigns. We drove up to the front steps, and I remember noticing that troops of soldiers were scattered all over the yard.”

“(I)n conference it was agreed between us … that Mrs Wilson should remain as my attendant; that Mr. Wilson would be the person to inform the government of any request to be made by me, and that any business transactions might be made through him.” (Liliʻuokalani)

“During the imprisonment here of Liliuokalani in 1895 Mrs Wilson was chosen by the ex-Queen as best friend and the relations between them were of the closest and most confidential nature. In the old court days here Mrs. Wilson was prominent both on account of her own position as a lady in waiting and her husband’s official rank.” Hawaiian Gazette, May 24, 1898)

During her imprisonment, Queen Liliʻuokalani was denied any visitors other than one lady in waiting (Mrs. Eveline Wilson.) Johnny would bring newspapers hidden in flowers from the Queen’s garden; reportedly, Liliʻuokalani’s famous song Kuʻu Pua I Paoakalani (written while imprisoned,) was dedicated to him (it speaks of the flowers at her Waikiki home, Paoakalani.)

Paoakalani written by Liliuokalani, performed by Kuuipo Kumukahi:
https://youtu.be/7tcbyAOAwz8

In 1897, Johnny Wilson and fellow Stanford student Louis Whitehouse won the bid to expand and construct a ‘carriage road’ over the Pali. Ground was broken on May 26, 1897 and the road was opened for carriages on January 19, 1898.

(When the current Pali Highway and its tunnels opened (1959,) the original roadway up and over the Pali was closed and is now used by hikers.)

Then, “It was a painful thing for our hearts to hear that the uncompassionate hand of death reached out and took the precious breath of life from the body of Mrs Evalaina Willison (Wilson,) the wife of Mr CB Willison (Wilson,) in the early morning of this Saturday, after she began to waste away of sickness for just a few short days.”

“She was a well-known woman here in town, and elsewhere on the island, and she was the attendant of Queen Liliuokalani while she was on the throne until her overthrow.”

“There were many, many friends who visited to see her for the last time, and then dust returned to dust, for that is where it came from. She leaves behind a husband, child and family who grieve for her from this side of the grave. (Aloha Aina, May 28, 1898)

Later, her son Johnny Wilson got involved with politics and is credited as being the most important Democrat in the first half of 20th-century Hawaiʻi; his name is used with Jack Burns in the party movement. He was in a meeting on April 30, 1900 that organized the Democratic Party of Hawaiʻi and served as Honolulu Mayor.

Initially known as the ‘Kalihi Tunnel’ (and often called the Likelike Tunnels,) the Wilson Tunnels are named in honor of John H Wilson. (1998 brought the completion of H-3 (and the Tetsuo Harano Tunnels – named after a longtime state highways administrator.))

Lyman C Newell, Queen’s lady-in-waiting, Queen Liliuokalani, Adam H Dickey & Mrs SK Kea-PP-98-13-007

September 25, 2026 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

‘For Manly Men’

“‘Here’s to another year and years and years of steady nerves, clear brains and vigorous health.’”

“Duncan is a body-builder and a good one. There are others in town all good ones. The town cannot have too many of them.” (Hawaiian Star, January 27, 1912) (Advertisements noted that Duncan’s Gym was for ‘Manly Men.’)

“‘If we can have a boy for two years, say from the age of twelve to fourteen,’ said Duncan, ‘we can make a well rounded youngster of him, and in addition to that the spirit of, true sportsmanship and love of the gym work for the work’s sake is so ingrained in him that he will never stop it.’”

“We don’t aim to turn out prizefighters, but we do aim to put a person in such shape that medicines and physicians will he unknown to him for a long time to come.” (Evening Bulletin, March 1, 1911)

“Duncan’s gymnasium isn’t half big enough to accommodate the youngsters who are anxious to join in the classes, but although the space is limited the boys take delight in playing the games that will make them stronger and fairer in every way.”

“A visit to the gymnasium will show hundreds of devices that have been built to improve the bodies of the youngsters, and the older people as well. Mr. Duncan has gone to much trouble in securing wheels and hundred s of implements of exercise that make for the building up or the youth.” (Star-Bulletin, May 3, 1916)

“At the recent Indoor meet held at the gymnasium a number of the parents looked on, and watched what the boys had accomplished during the class periods.”

“Many of the youngsters had gone into the classes with little of what one might call ‘pep,’ but the feats performed during the meet was enough to convince the mothers and fathers that the boy had been ‘learning the game.’”

“The meet showed the boys how to win; and how to take defeat.”

“The ‘thinking’ races were a big feature of the afternoon’s entertainment, and the race was not always to the swiftest.”

“A number of incidents happened during the afternoon that proved that the boys had teen taught to ‘play fair.’ One youngster with rosy cheeks who had been making a success won in a race, and after he had crossed the tape acknowledged to the referee that he had missed one of the relay pins.”

“In speaking of this incident afterwards Mr. Duncan said: ‘Things of that kind do the boy more good than a medal won, and I always try to encourage the boys to play fair at any cost.’”

“‘I wish that I had more room so I could cater to more of the boys and give them more room for the accomplishment of athletic features.’”

“Each afternoon many of the businessmen of the city spend an hour or so at the gymnasium, and the universal opinion is that it is more than worth the time spent.”

“Among the men of the city are many who have taken a deep interest in the youngsters, and at the recent track meet John Guild and Fred Wichman donated cups to the boys who competed in the various events.” (Star-Bulletin, May 3, 1916)

“Because of the great success made by GM Duncan in building up the weakling, there is much interest in his competition this afternoon. Mr. Duncan has divided the boys into two groups, the Reds and the Blues, and there is certain to be a number of events stated.”

“Fred Wichman said, ‘Mr. Duncan is doing a great work in developing the youngsters in every way, and he richly deserves credit for the manner in which he has helped the boys.’ Many of the leading businessmen of the city patronize the gymnasium and all join in singing praises for the manner in which the exercises are handled.”

“‘Mr. Duncan is doing a great work for the youngsters and for the older men as well. I use the gymnasium every day and find that it builds you up, and you can see that it has made the youngsters stronger. I would like to see a larger building where more boys could receive benefits from the exercise.’” (Guy Macfarlane) (Honolulu Star Bulletin, April 25, 1918)

September 24, 2026 by Peter T Young 2 Comments

Hawaiian Common Law

The first Hawaiʻi Supreme Court case to discuss “the rights common people to go to the mountains, and the seas attached to their own particular land exclusively” in the 1850 Kuleana Act was Oni v Meek (1858.)

Oni, a tenant of the ahupua’a of Honouliuli, O’ahu, filed suit against John Meek, who had a lease over the entire ahupuaʻa. Oni brought suit when some of his horses, which had been pastured on Meek’s land, were impounded and sold. Oni claimed that he had a right to pasture his horses (by custom and by language in the Kuleana Act.)

The Hawai’i Supreme Court rejected both arguments. For over a hundred years, the Oni v Meek case appeared to foreclose claims based on custom. (MacKenzie)

In 1892 the legislature of the Hawaiian Kingdom and Queen Liliʻuokalani passed a law that recognized Hawaiian usage as part of the common law of the Kingdom, together with the common law of England.

An act on November 25, 1892, Act to Reorganize the Judiciary Department, ch. LVII, § 5, 1892 Laws of Her Majesty Liliuokalani, Queen of the Hawaiian Islands, provided for exceptions to the English common law that were “established by Hawaiian national usage.”

This law, which is today known as Section 1-1 of the Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes (HRS,) provided the basis for the rights of the makaʻāinana (common people) beyond the rights reserved under the Kuleana Act, so as to include whatever was broadly customary as Hawaiian usage prior to 1892. (McGregor & MacKenzie)

HRS §1-1 Common law of the State; exceptions, states, “The common law of England, as ascertained by English and American decisions, is declared to be the common law of the State of Hawaii in all cases, except …”

“… as otherwise expressly provided by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or by the laws of the State, or fixed by Hawaiian judicial precedent, or established by Hawaiian usage; provided that no person shall be subject to criminal proceedings except as provided by the written laws of the United States or of the State. (Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes)

Effective January 1, 1893 and continuing today, common law was adopted “except as otherwise provided … or fixed by Hawaiian judicial precedent, or established by Hawaiian usage….” (HRS Case Notes)

In 1978, the Hawaiʻi State Constitution was amended to specifically recognize traditional and customary Hawaiian practices by adopting Article XII, Section 7:

“The State reaffirms and shall protect all rights, customarily and traditionally exercised for subsistence, cultural and religious purposes and possessed by ahupua’a tenants who are descendants of native Hawaiians who inhabited the Hawaiian Islands prior to 1778, subject to the right of the State to regulate such rights.”

In 1995, the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court, explained in the Public Access Shoreline Hawaii (PASH) case that “Oni merely rejected one particular claim based upon an apparently non-traditional practice that had not achieved customary status in the area where the right was asserted.” (MacKenzie)

The PASH Court stressed that “the precise nature and scope of the rights retained by (HRS) § 1-1 … depend upon the particular circumstances of each case”.

The Court set out a test for the doctrine of custom, requiring that a custom be consistent when measured against other customs; a practice be certain in an objective sense, “(A) particular custom is certain if it is objectively defined and applied; certainty is not subjectively determined”; and a traditional use be exercised in a reasonable manner.

The PASH Court also clarified that “those persons who are ‘descendants of native Hawaiians who inhabited the islands prior to 1778,’ and who assert otherwise valid customary and traditional Hawaiian rights under HRS 1-1, are entitled to protection regardless of their blood quantum.” (MacKenzie)

In the ‘Kapili’ case (dealing with entering undeveloped lands to gather, without unnecessarily disturbing the surrounding environment, natural products necessary for certain traditional native Hawaiian practices) the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court noted:

“The statutory exception to the common law is thus akin to the English doctrine of custom whereby practices and privileges unique to particular districts continued to apply to residents of those districts in contravention of the common law.”

“This, however, is not to say that we find that all the requisite elements of the doctrine of custom were necessarily incorporated in § 1-1. Rather, we believe that the retention of a Hawaiian tradition should in each case be determined by balancing the respective interests and harm once it is established that the application of the custom has continued in a particular area.” (Supreme Court, Kapili)

Related to this, in the Pele Defense Fund case, it was determined that, “The nature and scope of the rights reserved to hoaʻāina (tenants) by custom and usage are to be defined according to the values, traditions and customs associated with a particular area as transmitted from one generation to the next in the conduct of subsistence, cultural, and religious activities.”

That case also found that residency of a particular ahupuaʻa was not required for gather, noting, “Unlike other areas in Hawaii, Hawaiians historically crossed ahupua`a boundaries in the Puna district. …”

“…The hunting and gathering patterns in the Puna district are unique because they are influenced, to a large extent, by an active volcano, Kilauea. It can be reasonably inferred that volcanic eruptions in the Puna area force hunters and gatherers to change areas to find plants and animals for subsistence purposes.” (Circuit Court, PDF)

The Pele Defense Fund decision extended rights to non-Hawaiians, noting, “Accordingly, non-Hawaiians could have the same right as Hawaiians, irrespective of Article XII, § 7 if they could prove that their rights were based on custom and usage.”

“The Pele Defense Fund decision concluded with “a permanent injunction against excluding the following persons from entering the undeveloped portions of the land and using the developed portion for reasonable access to the undeveloped portions, to perform customarily and traditionally exercised subsistence and cultural practices:”

“(a) Hawaiian subsistence or cultural practitioners who are descendants of the inhabitants of the Hawaiian Islands prior to 1778; (b) Person or persons accompanying Hawaiian subsistence or cultural practitioners described in (a); or (c) Persons related by blood, marriage or adoption to Hawaiian subsistence or cultural practitioners described in (a).”

Within the same Hawaii Revised Statues is another important law (§5-7.5) ‘Aloha Spirit’.

‘Aloha Spirit’ is the coordination of mind and heart within each person. It brings each person to the self. Each person must think and emote good feelings to others. In the contemplation and presence of the life force, “Aloha”, the following unuhi laula loa may be used:
‘Akahai,’ kindness to be expressed with tenderness;
‘Lokahi,’ unity, to be expressed with harmony;
‘Oluolu,’ agreeable, to be expressed with pleasantness;
‘Haahaa,’ humility, to be expressed with modesty;
‘Ahonui,’ patience, to be expressed with perseverance.

‘Aloha’ is more than a word of greeting or farewell or a salutation. ‘Aloha’ means mutual regard and affection and extends warmth in caring with no obligation in return.

‘Aloha’ is the essence of relationships in which each person is important to every other person for collective existence. ‘Aloha’ means to hear what is not said, to see what cannot be seen and to know the unknowable.

Aloha, it’s the law.