Peter T Young

July 1, 2016 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Antoinette Francesa Marin

Don Francisco de Paula Marin (known to the Hawaiian as “Manini”) was a Spaniard who arrived in the Hawaiian Islands in 1793 or 1794 (at about the age of 20.) Manini’s nickname appears to be the closest way that the Hawaiians could pronounce his name.

Marin spoke four languages (he arrived fluent in Spanish, French and English, and learned Hawaiian) and was employed by Kamehameha as Interpreter, Bookkeeper and part time Physician (although he had no formal medical training, he had some basic medical knowledge.) He also served as purchasing agent for the arms that proved decisive to Kamehameha’s victory of the Battle of Nu‘uanu (1795.)

Among his several children, Marin had a daughter, Antoinette Francesa Marin, who was born on October 6, 1832 in Honolulu, Hawaiʻi.

Her father died in 1837 and Antoinette was hānai to Dr Thomas Charles Byde and Grace Kamaikui Rooke; he was one of three physicians in Honolulu in the 1830s. (Santa Cruz Sentinel, December 14, 1941) (Emma, later Queen Emma, was also adopted by the Rookes.)

Antoinette later married Lyman Swan (born on February 26, 1823 at Jefferson County in Watertown, New York,) a partner in Swan & Clifford. “In 1848 (Ornan O Clifford) came to Honolulu and shortly after entered into co-partnership with Lyman Swan in the baking business, at the corner of King and Fort streets.” (Hawaiian Gazette, May 28, 1884)

In April of 1853, Antoinette gave birth to the couple’s first child, Olivia (“Lily,”) and the young Swan family appeared to be living a life of prosperity and promise in Honolulu. (Dunn & Stoner)

Thrum notes Swan and Clifford were consignees to the first cargo of ice to the Islands that came from Sitka, per brig “Noble,” in October, 1854.

But as often would be the case with Lyman Swan throughout his life, appearances were often deceiving. Business records for Swan & Clifford indicate that while the chandlery was doing a booming business, income was not keeping up with expenses.

Apparently, unbeknownst to his partner, Swan was forging $40,000 in promissory notes and leaving over $80,000 in unpaid bills. A $5,000 reward was offered for information on his whereabouts. (Anderson)

Clifford declared his innocence. (Dunn & Stoner) Lyman left town and headed for California.

“Swan & Clifford bought and refitted the condemned bark George for whaling and trading … the senior member of the firm taking passage by her, on departure, to evade the impending crisis in their affairs in consequence of his own questionable transactions.”

“In the fall the vessel reported at San Francisco with 500 bbls oil, where Mr Swan remained. The ship on arrival here was seized by the marshal for the assignees and in due time was sold, as she lay”. (Thrum) Lyman was apprehended in Alameda.

All of the forged bills had been executed in Swan’s handwriting. While Hawaiian authorities tried to extradite Swan, he was never to return to the islands. He endured several years of both civil and criminal cases against him in San Francisco (he was found guilty on several, but not all, counts;) it’s uncertain if he was sentenced to any time in prison. (Dunn & Stoner)

Somehow, he managed to bring Antoinette and daughter Lily to California during his court cases, where the family first resided in San Jose. (Dunn & Stoner) Then, the family settled in Santa Cruz in around 1857.

They are considered one of the ‘Pioneers’ of Santa Cruz; Lyman was one of the signatories of the Constitution and Roll of Members of the Society of Pioneers of Santa Cruz County.

Swan returned to his roots and opened a bakery on Pacific Avenue; the Swans were popular and widely respected pillars of the Santa Cruz business community.

The family purchased a large plot of land in downtown Santa Cruz, at what is now the corner of Front and Cathcart Streets, that backed up to the San Lorenzo River. At least two of the Swan sons, Frank and Alfred, then in their twenties, joined in the family business. (Dunn & Stoner)

But the Swan marriage was not a happy one. Lyman Swan’s larceny may have long been hidden from the Santa Cruz community, but he couldn’t hide it from Antoinette, whom he had shamed with his activities in Honolulu.

Antoinette decided to return to the islands for lengthy periods of time and was Queen Kapiʻolani’s Chambermaid for approximately 5-years. (Santa Cruz Sentinel, October 3, 1905) She returned to Santa Cruz.

When Princes David Kawānanakoa (Koa,) Edward Keliʻiahonui and Jonah Kūhiō Kalanianaʻole, nephews of Queen Kapiʻolani, were schooled at St Matthew’s Hall in San Mateo in 1885, they were placed under the careful eye of Antoinette Swan.

When the Swan home became too crowded, the princes boarded at the nearby Wilkins House, located half a block away, on Pacific and Cathcart streets. (Dunn & Stoner)

The three princes are noted in the first account of surfing anywhere in the Americas: “The young Hawaiian princes were in the water, enjoying it hugely and giving interesting exhibitions of surf-board swimming as practiced in their native islands.” (Santa Cruz Daily Surf, July 20, 1885; Divine)

“Mrs Antoinette Don Paul Marie Swan was courtly in manner, and had a charm in her dealing with people that won many friends.”

“She was a kind neighbor and a devoted mother, loved by her children.” She was clearly a well-liked and widely respected member of the community. (Santa Cruz Daily Surf, October 2, 1905; Dunn & Stoner)

She died on October 1, 1905 at the age of 72 and was buried at the Independent Order of Odd Fellows (IOOF) Cemetery. (Society of California Pioneers of Santa Cruz County)

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

Antoinette_Swan-400

Kalakaua & Kapiolani – Iolani Palace with Col. Charles Hastings Judd (Chamberlain), and Antoinette F. Manini Swan (Chambermaid)-WC

Antoinette-Swan-400

Queen_Kapiolani_on_the_Iolani_Palace_grounds with Antoinette Swan-(PP-97-14-016)

Royal_Bungalow_outside_Iolani_Palace_(PP-11-2-003)

Kalakaua & Kapiolani and others in front of the Bungalow including Antoinette Swan PP-96-13-016

Chest of Don Francisco de Paula y Marin, later Antoinette Swan-PP-37-4-005

Chest of Don Francisco de Paula y Marin, later Antoinette Swan-PP-37-4-004

Frank Manini to Antoinette Swan-letter (portion)

June 30, 2016 by Peter T Young 1 Comment

Tong Kee

During the spring of 1887, mounting dissatisfaction with government policies and private acts of officials led to the formation of the Hawaiian League, a group of Honolulu businessmen (largely, but not exclusively, haole (Caucasian.)) One issue they were particularly incensed by was the opium franchise bribery case, in which the King was implicated. (Forbes)

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.”

“The Attorney General then sees that there is no use in denying the receipt of the money but suggests that if a quiet tongue is kept in the matter the cash received for the bribe may be returned.”

“This is a pretty piece of morality for the Attorney General to put forth and shows the obliquity of vision of all who are connected with the government.” (Hawaiian Gazette, May 17, 1887)

The Aki scandal was one of the events that mobilized many of the haole residents to organize and establish an armed body. (Lim-Chong & Ball) The Hawaiian League came into control of the Honolulu Rifles (made of about 200 armed men.)

On the afternoon of June 30, 1887, the league held a mass meeting during which they presented a list of reforms they intended to submit to the king. Among them were demands that the king dismiss his cabinet, and that Walter Murry Gibson be dismissed of ‘each and every office held by him.’

After that was accomplished, in July 1887, King Kalākaua was induced to promulgate a new constitution, known as the “Bayonet Constitution of 1887.” (Forbes)

Let’s look back …

Celso Caesar Moreno, a professional lobbyist well known in Sacramento and Washington, DC, arrived in Honolulu on the China Merchant Steam Navigation Company’s ship ‘Ho-chung’ in November 1879.

One week later, he invited King Kalākaua, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Royal Chamberlain aboard the steamer to meet Fan Yau Ki, a wealthy Chinese industrialist. One of the things Moreno was looking for was the liberalization of Hawai‘i’s strict opium laws. He advocated making Honolulu the opium processing and distribution center for the whole Pacific.

An opium bill was passed providing for a license for four years, to be granted by the minister of the interior with the consent of the King. (Reports of Committee on Foreign Relations)

Early in November, 1886, Junius Kaae, (who has access to the King,) informed a Chinese rice planter named Tong Kee, alias Aki, that he could have the opium license granted to him if he would pay the sum of $60,000 to the King’s private purse …”

“… but that he must be in haste because other parties were bidding for the privilege. (Executive Documents US House of Representatives, 1895)

In a later affidavit, Tong Kee (Aki) described what happened …

“I met Junius Kaae in the street and he spoke to me in Hawaiian and said ‘Do you not want the opium license?’ I replied ‘Yes, perhaps so,’ and asked him how it could be obtained. He said he could help me. A few days after this I went to the Record Office with some documents for record.”

“While there, he took me outside of the door and spoke of the matter again saying ‘I can help you about it and will push it until you get it but it will take a great deal of money. Several people have been to me to help them but he who takes money to the king, and a great deal of it, will get the license.’”

First, “I was to get 20,000 … I went to look for the King (and) found him in the Palace. I then went in and handed him a letter … He read it laughed and said ‘Where is that money?’”

“I replied that it was outside in a carriage so we … walked outside upon one of the verandas – when he looked around and seeing a good many people about, said, ‘It won’t do now, come again at six this evening with your money.’”

“We … then went to the King’s office in the Bungalow and carried the basket (‘heavy with gold’) … Kaae … asked where the money was. It having been pointed out to him he took a key from his pocket unlocked and opened a drawer in the Kings table …”

“… into which he put all of the gold and certificates locked the drawer again and put the key into his pocket. I asked for a receipt but he refused saying that it would be all right that if I did not get the license all of the money would be returned”.

“The next day Kaae came to the house and said that he and the King had counted over the money the evening before and that it was short of $20,000 by $2.50 so I handed that to him in silver.”

“I then set about raising the last $40,000 … Upon the 7th of December … I went … to the Palace and handed the King in person a check for $10,000 …”

“The King took the check looked at it and put it in his pocket. … The same day Kaae came to me with the check and said as he handed it back, that I must draw the money as it would not do to have any checks – that the King said that by and by people would find out about it and it would be all exposed.”

Tong Kee then delivered ‘a large package of certificates’ ($10,000 in cash.) Kaae “then urged me very strongly about getting the remaining $30,000.” Tong Hee then brought more money. “The King then invited us into the office. We entered and presented him with a letter … and said ‘Where is the money?’” They were invited into the King’s office.

“The King went into a door on the Ewa side of the room mauka end … (we) put the baskets on the floor near the door – but the King said, ‘No, not there,’ and going to a trunk unlocked and opened it and then taking out some quilts … (we were) told to put the money in there.”

They laid the bags in the trunk; “The King laid back the quilts closed and locked the trunk and put the key in his pocket. … We were then dismissed.”

“Very soon after this Kaae came to my house – others were there. He looked angy or disturbed. He said, ‘The King has shown me a letter from John S Walker, in which he said that Kwong Sam Kee had been to him and wanted him to assist them about an opium license. That they offered $75,000 for it’ … Now what do you think, Aki? If you don’t give more money, Kwong Sam Kee will get that license!’”

“We went to the Bungalow (with more money) and waited on the same veranda as formerly … The King came soon and we presented the pig which caused him a smile of pleasure. … He asked where the money was and on seeing it entered into conversation about the license.”

“Seeing people about I suggested that the money had better be put away. He then sent off a Lelewa woman who was sweeping and himself carried the basket into the same room where the $30,000 had been put. This $15,000 was mostly in US gold but it contained some certificates and the whole was in a basket.”

“(W)e went away but I first asked him when the license would be issued to me. He replied that it must be done in regular course through the Ministers as by law required that there would be a meeting very soon and he promised to help me about it.”

Tong Kee was later informed that Chun Lung was getting the opium license. The King informed him that he would have a share in the license. “The King finally said that he had arranged it that the license had fifteen shares in all – that Chung Lung was to have five, I was to have five and he was to keep five himself.”

“Fearing that I should lose all my money I agreed to this proposition on condition that part of my money was returned. I said that as $75,000 were paid to the King for the whole license and I was only to have a third that $50,000 should be returned and the King might keep $25,000.”

“But he gave no definite answer to this at that time but said it was to be arranged by and by after the whole matter was adjusted.” But resolution was uncertain “it appealing that he (Kalākaua) was constantly shifting his ground.”

“I asked the King to return me all of my money and drop the whole thing. He exclaimed that this could not be done that it was all understood and arranged about the division of the license and could not be changed.”

“I insisted on the return of my money. He finally seemed to assent to this and intimated that by and by he would pay me back when they paid in their money. I do not know who he meant but inferred from what had been said that he meant the opium licensee.” (Affidavit of T Aki (Tong Kee;) Hawaiian Gazette, May 31, 1887)

Just when it seemed that Aki himself was about to come forward and make a statement … he died under mysterious circumstances. It was widely believed that he was poisoned.” (Zambucka)

The King’s disastrous financial affairs were then placed in the hands of trustees. Aki’s estate petitioned for return of what he paid Kalākaua.

On September 21, 1888, Judge Preston decided, “the claim against the defendants for the sum of $71,000 is established as just and correct within the meaning of the deed of trust in the bill mentioned and that the complainants are entitled to be paid pro rata with other approved claims …”

“… and order defendants (Kalākaua’s trustees) to pay the same accordingly out of the moneys which may have come to their hands under the trust of the said deed …” (Zambucka)

The Aki scandal was one of the events that mobilized Kalākaua’s enemies to secretly plot his downfall and ultimately led to the 1887 Constitution, known as the ‘Bayonet Constitution,’ which took away much of the king’s power. (IslandExpat)

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

Opium_smoking

OpiumSmoking

opium-canton

opium-smoking

Opium Pipes © Underwood & Underwood/CORBIS

June 29, 2016 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Waikīkī Church

By the time the first company of American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions (ABCFM) Protestant missionaries arrived in 1820, Kamehameha I had died and the centuries-old kapu system had been abolished. The Hawaiian people had already dismantled their heiau and had rejected their religious beliefs.

The missionaries, less the group left on the Big Island, landed at Honolulu on April 19, 1820. On the sabbath (April 23,) Hiram Bingham, the leader of the group, preached the first formal Protestant sermon in the Islands. Initial services were in thatched structures. Later, a more permanent church was built.

In July, 1821, they began to build a 22 by 54-foot building, large enough to seat 300. This first church building was built of thatch and lined with mats; however, it had glass windows, doors, a wooden pulpit and 2-rows of seats, separated by an aisle. In August of that year, Captain Templeton presented a bell from his ship to be used at the church.

Within a year, Hiram Bingham began to preach in the Hawaiian language. 4-services a week were conducted (3 in Hawaiian and 1 in English.) Congregations ranged from 100 – 400; by the end of the year, the church was expanded.

On May 30, 1824, the church burned to the ground. Within a couple of days after the fire, Kalanimōkū ordered a new church to be built at public expense. A new thatched building (25 by 70 feet) was placed a short distance from the old; it was dedicated July 18, 1824.

Interest in the mission’s message outgrew the church and services were held outside with 3,000 in attendance; efforts were underway to build a larger facility, to accommodate 4,000.

In December, 1825, the third Meeting House building was opened for worship; however, shortly afterward a violent rain storm collapsed the structure. In 1827, Kaʻahumanu stepped forward and “caused a temporary house to be erected which is 86 feet by 30, with 2 wings each 12 feet wide extending the whole length of the building. … It is not large enough to accommodate all who attend the service on Sabbath mornings, many are obliged to sit without.” (Mission Journal – Damon)

The last of the thatched churches served for 12-years. It measured 63 by 196 feet (larger than the present Kawaiahaʻo Church) – 4,500 people could assemble within it.

Then, between 1836 and 1842, Kawaiahaʻo Church was constructed. Revered as the Protestant “mother church” and often called “the Westminster Abbey of Hawai‘i” this structure is an outgrowth of the original Mission Church founded in Boston and is the first foreign church on O‘ahu (1820.)

Kawaiahaʻo Church was designed by its first pastor, Bingham. Following five years of construction, Kawaiahaʻo was ready for dedication ceremonies on July 21, 1842. The grounds of Kawaiahaʻo overflowed with 4,000 to 5,000 faithful worshippers. King Kamehameha III, who contributed generously to the fund to build the church, attended the service.

There were ten ‘āpana, or branches, of the Kawaiahaʻo Church. One of them was the Waikīkī Church (the others included Kalihi, Palama, Nuʻuanu, Pauoa, Moʻiliʻili, Pālolo, Kaimuki, Puaikalani (Kakaʻako) and Kawaiahaʻo itself. (Damon)

Across Kalākaua Avenue in front of the Moana Hotel, on the present site of the shops and Princess Kaʻiulani Hotel, was the first grammar school in Waikīkī, a small graveyard and the church. (Cultural Surveys)

“The Little Church at Waikīkī … The congregation which has worshipped in this church is numerous but poor …. The pretty little church among the cocoanuts is besides a prominent ornament to the neighborhood”.

The church was damaged by a thunderbolt … “It seems that the house was badly shattered – in fact rendered untenable in wet weather, and that it will cost in the neighborhood of five hundred dollars to put it again in good condition …”

“We beg to suggest a concert or other public entertainment to raise funds for the repair of the Waikīkī Church building.” (Pacific Commercial Advertiser, December 18, 1875)

It turns out the Waikīkī Church was a venue for many concerts, to raise money for the Waikīkī property, as well as Kawaiahaʻo in downtown – and they had frequent royal guests.

“A concert was given on Wednesday evening, commencing at half past seven o’clock, at the Waikīkī Church in aid of Kawaiahao Church. Their Royal Highnesses Princess Liliʻuokalani and Princess Likelike took an active part in promoting the furtherance of this good object, and both of these good ladies also took part in carrying out the programme.”

“The Misses Cleghorn and other young ladies also assisted. A drive to Waikīkī on a beautiful moonlight night is of itself a treat, which was greatly enhanced, by the anticipation of hearing good vocal and instrumental music on arrival there.” (Pacific Commercial Advertiser, December 15, 1883)

“A musical entertainment was given at Waikīkī Church on Wednesday evening. Their Royal Highnesses the Princesses Liliuokalani and Likelike had taken a great interest in the affair and many of their friends from town took the opportunity to indulge in a moonlight drive and be present at the concert.”

“The church was filled and there was a not inconsiderable audience that preferred the open air and the soft grass of the churchyard to the accommodations provided for them inside … “It is to be hoped that this is not the last time that the people of Waikīkī will invite their town friends to come and hear them sing.” (Pacific Commercial Advertiser, December 15, 1883)

In an interview for the Oral History Project conducted by the Social Science Research Institute, University of Hawai‘i, interviewee Mary Paoa Clarke (born in 1902) recalls the Waikīkī School:

“We (Mary and her siblings) went to Waikīkī School – that’s across the Moana Hotel – which is (where) the (Princess) Kaʻiulani Hotel (is) now. We walked from our home to school”. Mary also noted that the Waikīkī School only went up to third grade. “We started in the fourth grade at Kaʻahumanu”. (Social Science Research Institute)

“… I had gone to the Waikīkī (Elementary) School for three years. There was Mrs Henry, Mrs Perry and Mrs Ontai. (The) first Waikīkī School was opposite the Moana Hotel – across the street. (There were) three rooms, first, second and third. In one corner of the property there was a graveyard and an old Hawaiian church.) (Lemon Wond “Rusty” Holt, Sr; Social Science Research Institute)

In 1916, Kawaiaha‘o sold the cemetery land around the Waikīkī ‘āpana (branch) church to the Territorial Hotel Co, Ltd, owners of the Moana Hotel.

A new lot was obtained from the Lili‘uokalani Trust; plans for the construction of a new church began immediately, as the church contracted for the construction of a one-story frame building in 1916 on a new lot, near the corner of Kūhiō Avenue and ʻOhua Lane (in the area now occupied by the Waikīkī Banyan Condominium, which was built in 1979.)

Owing to the sale of the Waikīkī Church premises for the extension of the Moana Hotel accessories, some fifty or more bodies which had been interred in its grounds were exhumed and removed to the cemetery of the mother church, Kawaiahaʻo. (Thrum, 1916)

Kawaiahaʻo Church took the responsibility “to remove all remains and coffins buried in the church yard (so far as practical) and re-inter them in some cemetery or cemeteries in the district of Honolulu,” with the costs of the removal to be borne by the Territorial Hotel Co.

Those interred in the Protestant cemetery ranged from as young as 2 weeks to 80 years of age and were noted as having passed away from a variety of causes such as “consumption”, “constipation”, “meningitis”, “diabetes”, “whooping cough”, the most common cause being “old age.” With perhaps one exception, all of the names appear to be Hawaiians who died between 1880 and 1907. (Cultural Surveys)

“Then the Moana (Hotel) built a lot of cottages in there. Of course then years later they were torn down and they built the Princess Ka‘iulani Hotel.” (Leslie Fullard-Leo (born 1909;) Social Science Research Institute)

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

Waikiki-Bishop-Reg1398-1985 (1881)-portion_noting_Waikiki_Church

Sanford_Ins_Waikiki-Moana-Waikiki_Church-1914 zoom

Sanford_Ins_Waikiki-Moana-Waikiki_Church-1914-zoom

Sanford_Ins_Waikiki-Moana-Waikiki_Church-1914_zoom

Sanford_Ins_Waikiki-Moana-Waikiki_Church-1914

Uluniu-Makai-DAGS_2329-1874-portion-noting Waikiki Church

Moana and Cottages-Cultural Surveys-1930

Moana Cottages-PP-42-2-029

Cottages moved in 1953-Princess Kaiulani Constructed after that

HonoluluDoveRandMcNally-map-1912-portion-Waikiki_Church-noted

Honolulu_Harbor-Diamond_Head-Monsarrat-Reg1910 (1897)-portion_Waikiki_Church noted

DAGS_LCA_315-Waikiki-Church_and_School-Mauka_of_Moana

June 28, 2016 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Muses of Hawai‘i

Hawaiian Mission Houses Historic Site and Archives recently produced another Cemetery Pupu Theatre event at Oʻahu Cemetery – Muses of Hawai‘i.

It’s a unique dinner theatre experience where history comes alive for the evening, brought to you by Mission Houses and Oʻahu Cemetery.

Mission Houses discovers stories from the lives of prominent Hawaiʻi residents and brings those stories back to life – in the cemetery, at the place where that person is buried.

Muses of Hawai‘i – the current version of ‘dinner theatre in a cemetery’ is focused on a small sample of people – historians and authors, a dramatist and actor, a museum curator, and a musician – who have contributed to the humanities in the history of Hawai‘i.

These characters all speak from their own perspectives about the same place and approximate time. These people all knew one another, or at least knew about one another, and often had something to say about each other.

See if you can catch their references to each other during their performances.

Standing at five different headstones, actors perform a monologue of the lives of the people buried at Oʻahu Cemetery.

Actors are dressed in period costume, telling the life events of select individuals, at their respective grave sites.

There was nothing ghoulish about it; rather, it was very effective storytelling.

Johnny Noble (Portrayed by Zach Thomas Woods)

Johnny Noble (1892-1944,) who took his inspiration from Sonny Cunha, who created hapa haole music in 1900 by mixing traditional Hawaiian music with American ragtime. Noble took Cunha’s idea a step further and mixed Hawaiian music with jazz and blues with for a new style of hapa haole music.

Critics said it degraded and commercialized Hawaiian music, but audiences loved it. “Sing Me a Song of Hawaii,” “My Little Grass Shack,” “Hula Blues,” and “Hawaiian War Chant” are among some of his most recognizable songs. He also recorded hundreds of traditional Hawaiian songs. (Wayne Paakaula is the Ukulele player.)

Ethel Damon (Portrayed by Alicia Rice)

Ethel Moseley Damon (1883 – 1965) authored several plays including Punahou’s 75th Anniversary Pageant and The Romance of Reality: A Historical Play in Two Acts, a centennial missionary memorial play.

She also authored Samuel Chenery Damon (a biography of her grandfather), Early Hawaiian Churches and Their Manner of Building, and her seminal history of Kaua‘i Koamalu: A Story of Pioneers on Kauai.

Thomas Thrum (Portrayed by Eli Foster)

Thomas Thrum (1842 – 1932) operated a book and stationery store. In 1875 he produced the first issue of Hawaiian Almanac and Annual which is commonly referred to as Thrum’s Annual.

He was the first editor of Paradise of the Pacific in 1888 and published several collections of Hawaiian legends and several publications on Hawaiian heiau.

Emma Nakuina (Portrayed by Kahana Ho)

Emma Nakuina (1847 – 1929) was the first woman curator of a museum in Hawai‘i. She became curatrix of the Hawaiian National Museum in the Judicial Building during Kalakaua’s reign and authored Hawaii: Its People and Their Legends and Ancient Hawaiian Water Rights and Some Customs Pertaining to Them, among many others.

Nathaniel Emerson (Portrayed by Christopher Denton)

Nathaniel B. Emerson (1839 – 1915) was a physician, author, and husband of Dr. Sarah Emerson. He was the author of The Unwritten Literature of Hawaii: the Sacred Songs of the Hula; and Pele and Hiʻiaka: A Myth from Hawai‘i.

This Cemetery Pupu Theatre was researched by Mike Smola, script was written by Zach Thomas Woods, wardrobe by Peggy Krock and directed by William Haʻo.

The next Mission Houses program, 5:30 – 8 pm, Saturday, July 16, 2016, will be the ‘Aloha Ho‘oipoipo’ portion of Mission Houses ‘Na Mele Aloha’ series ($30 each in advance, or $35 at door.) (To be held at Mission Houses.)

This performance will explore romantic love through songs, mele ho‘oipoipo, both those which openly reveal the individuals in such a relationship and those songs which use kaona or hidden meanings to obscure the specific relationships.

Click HERE to make your reservation for 5:30 – 8 pm, Saturday, July 16, 2016, ‘Na Mele Aloha’ series ‘Aloha Ho‘oipoipo’:

Check out the Mission Houses website for future programs and events, as well as the many other activities at the historic site on King and Kawaiahaʻo Streets. Click HERE.

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

Mission Houses Museum – Cemetery Pupu Theatre – Muses of Hawaii

Johnny Noble (Portrayed by Zach Thomas Woods-Wayne Paakaula on Ukulele)

Ethel Damon (Portrayed by Alicia Rice)

Thomas Thrum (Portrayed by Eli Foster)

Emma Nakuina (Portrayed by Kahana Ho)

Nathaniel Emerson (Portrayed by Christopher Denton)

June 27, 2016 by Peter T Young 1 Comment

Recognition

In 1893, “[a] so-called Committee of Safety, a group of professionals and businessmen, with the active assistance of John Stevens, the United States Minister to Hawai‘i, acting with the United States Armed Forces, replaced the [Hawaiian] monarchy with a provisional government.” (US Supreme Court; Hawaii v OHA, 2008) The Provisional Government was soon recognized by foreign states.

“The term ‘recognition,’ when used in the context of recognition of States and governments in international law, may have several different meanings. It may indicate the recognizing State’s willingness to enter into official relations with a new State or government, or manifest its opinion on the legal status of a new entity or authority, or both.”

“The subject has been complicated by the introduction of several variants of the term. Distinctions between ‘de facto recognition,’ ‘diplomatic recognition’ and ‘de jure recognition’ may be traced back to the secession of the Spanish provinces in South America in early 19th century.”

“Like ‘recognition,’ these terms can be given meaning only by establishing the intention of the authority using them within the factual and legal context of each case. Recognition is a unilateral act performed by the recognizing State’s government. It may be express or implicit.” (Talmon)

“In his Allgemeine Staatslehre (General Theory of the State), published in 1900, Georg Jellinek developed the doctrine of the three elements of statehood, according to which a State exists if a population, on a certain territory, is organized under an effective public authority.”

“Although some authors have criticized this definition as treating the State as a purely factual phenomenon, it is still the definition most commonly found in State practice.”

“There are usually two requirements regarding the element of ‘public authority:’ internally, it must exercise the highest authority, that is, it must possess the power to determine the constitution of the State (internal sovereignty) …”

“… externally, it must be independent of other States (external sovereignty). Independence of other States refers to legal, not factual, independence; that is, the State must only be subject to international law, not to the laws of any other State.”

“When a State recognizes a new ‘government,’ it usually acknowledges a person or group of persons as competent to act as the organ of the State and to represent it in its international relations. The only criterion in international law for the recognition of an authority as the government of a State is its exercise of effective control over the State’s territory.” (Talmon)

The Hawaiian Kingdom became recognized through statements and treaties with Austria-Hungary (June 18, 1875), now Austria and Hungary; Belgium (October 4, 1862); Bremen (March 27, 1854) now Germany; Denmark (Oct. 19, 1846); France (September 8, 1858); French Tahiti (November 24, 1853); Germany (March 25, 1879); Great Britain (March 26, 1846); Great Britain’s New South Wales (March 10, 1874), now Australia …

… Hamburg (January 8, 1848), now Germany; Italy (July 22, 1863); Japan (Aug. 19, 1871, January 28, 1886); Netherlands (October 16, 1862); Portugal (May 5, 1882); Russia (June 19, 1869); Samoa (March 20, 1887); Spain (October 9, 1863); Sweden and Norway (April 5, 1855), now separate States; Switzerland (July 20, 1864); and the United States of America (December 20, 1849.) (Sai)

Then came the overthrow of the constitutional monarchy in 1893. Following the overthrow, Consulate offices in Honolulu recognized the Provisional Government as the “de facto government of the Hawaiian Islands.” John L Stevens, for the US Legation, acknowledged the Provisional Government on January 17, 1893.

On January 18, 1893, the Imperial German Consulate, Austro-Hungarian Consulate, Consul for Italy, Russian acting consul, Vice-Consul for Spain, Consulate of The Netherlands, Royal Danish Consulate, Consulate of Belgium, Consul for Mexico, Consulate of Chile, Office of the Peruvian Consulate, Consul-General and Charge d’Affaires of Portugal, Consulate and Commissariat of France and Chinese Commercial Agency wrote letters acknowledging (de facto) the Provisional Government. On January 19, 1893, the British Legation and His Imperial Japanese Majesty’s Consulate.

With respect to transformation of the State status in Hawai‘i, the Provisional Government of Hawai‘i then established voter eligibility, convened a constitutional convention, approved a new constitution and the Republic of Hawaiʻi was established on July 4, 1894.

Shortly after (from August 1894 through January 1895,) a number of letters of formal diplomatic recognition (de jure) of the Republic of Hawai‘i were conveyed to the Republic of Hawai‘i President Sanford Dole.

These included formal letters from Austria/Hungary, Belgium, Brazil, Britain, Chile, China, France, Germany/Prussia, Guatemala, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Netherlands, Norway and Sweden, Peru, Portugal, Russia, Spain , Switzerland and the United States. (These were countries that had prior agreements and treaties with the Hawaiian Monarchy.)

An August 7, 1894 letter notes US President Grover Cleveland wrote to Republic of Hawai‘i President Sanford B Dole, saying “… I cordially reciprocate the sentiments you express for the continuance of the friendly relations which have existed between the United States and the Hawaiian islands”.

In his annual ‘Message to Congress’ (1895,) President Cleveland noted, “Since communicating the voluminous correspondence in regard to Hawai‘i and the action taken by the Senate and House of Representatives on certain questions submitted to the judgment and wider discretion of Congress …”

“… the organization of a government in place of the provisional arrangement which followed the deposition of the Queen has been announced, with evidence of its effective operation. The recognition usual in such cases has been accorded the new Government.”

Republic of Hawai‘i President Sanford Dole sent a delegation to Washington in 1894, seeking annexation to the US. Regarding the annexation discussions, US Secretary of State John Sherman noted …

“(T)he plan of union with the United States became an uncertain contingency, the organization of the Hawaiian Commonwealth underwent necessary changes; the temporary character of its first (Provisional) Government gave place to a permanent scheme (Republic) under a constitution framed by the representatives of the electors of the islands …”

“… administration by an executive council not chosen by suffrage, but self-appointed, was succeeded by an elective and parliamentary regime, and the ability of the new Government to hold – as the Republic of Hawaii – an independent place in the family of sovereign States, preserving order at home and fulfilling international obligations abroad, has been put to the proof.”

“Recognized by the powers of the earth, sending and receiving envoys, enforcing respect for the law, and maintaining peace within its island borders …”

“… Hawaii sends to the United States, not a commission representing a successful revolution, but the accredited plenipotentiary of a constituted and firmly established sovereign State. … the Republic of Hawai‘i approaches the United States as an equal”. (US Secretary of State Sherman, June 15, 1897)

On June 15, 1898, the Newlands resolution passed the House by a vote of 209 to 91; the vote on the Newlands Resolution in the Senate was 42 to 21 (2/3 of the votes by Senators were in favor of the resolution, a significantly greater margin was cast by Representatives in the House.) (Cyclopedic Review of Current History, 4th Quarter 1898)

The US Constitution, Article II, Section 2 states: “(The President) shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur …” The following day, July 7, 1898, President McKinley signed the Newlands Resolution it into law.

On August 12, 1898, there were ceremonial functions held in Honolulu at which the Hawaiian government was formally notified by the US minister plenipotentiary and envoy extraordinary of the adoption and approval of the joint resolution aforesaid, and at which the Hawaiian government made, an unequivocal transfer and cession of its sovereignty and property. (Territorial Supreme Court; Albany Law Journal)

On June 27, 1959, when the matter of Statehood was put to a popular vote, Hawaiʻi registered voters voted on the question of Statehood (there was a 93.6% voter turnout for the General election – as compared to less than 50% today.)

Shall the following proposition, as set forth in Public Law 86-3 entitled ‘An Act to provide for the admission of the State of Hawaii into the Union’ be adopted? 1. Shall Hawaii immediately be admitted into the Union as a State? – 94.3% voted in support.

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger