Images of Old Hawaiʻi

by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Lady Dog Legislature

“Liliʻuokalani County. Word was received from Honolulu by wireless telegraph yesterday, that the county bill has passed the Senate, changing the name of Maui to Liliuokalani and changing the county seat to Lahaina.” (Maui News, April 27, 1901)

While news announcement was premature (President Dole effectively vetoed the legislation,) a new County governance structure and other legislation were proposed in the first legislative session of the Legislature of the Territory of Hawaiʻi in 1901.

The first session started on February 20, 1901 and lasted a total of 127-days (Regular Session 58-days; Special Session 69-days – the last day of the ‘Extra Session’ was July 29, 1901) – today, pursuant to Article III, section 10, of the Hawaiʻi State Constitution:

“The legislature shall convene annually in regular session at 10:00 o’clock a.m. on the third Wednesday in January … Regular sessions shall be limited to a period of sixty days, and special sessions shall be limited to a period of thirty days.” (Hawaiʻi Constitution) (Further extensions are possible.)

That first legislative session of the Territorial Legislature was later nicknamed the ‘Lady Dog Legislature’. It relates to multiple measures and extensive discussion seeking amendment to the taxes charged on dogs (reducing the female dog tax from $3 to $1 – the rate on male dogs.)

“The provision for increasing the tax on female dogs to three dollars was enacted by the Legislature of 1898 for the purpose of improving the quality of dogs in the Hawaiian Islands, and incidentally of decreasing the number of inferior dogs. The higher tax on female dogs tends directly to this result.” (Governor’s Message)

The press criticized the legislature: “The stray dogs are being gathered in, and the weeping owners is beseeching the clemency of the Deputy Sheriff. Now is the time when the wiley Hawaiian and Portuguese entices the small dog into his premises and eases him of his collar and tag. The tag system for dogs is worthy of a Solomon.”

“Who invented it, is now lost among the mists of history. The honest man pays his dog tax and the dishonest rogue profits by it. It is reported by the dog catcher that the lady dogs are not grateful to the lady dog legislature. They used to take a pride, in their three dollar tags, and now they are only adorned with a dollar tag.” (Hawaiian Star, June 3, 1902)

Some suggest the criticism of the legislature was racially-based. In 1900, the Kanaka Maoli (aboriginal Hawaiians) had formed their own 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)

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. (Report of the Governor, 1920)

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. With Republicans dominating both chambers, it is clear that most of the Hawaiians were Republicans. (Report of the Governor, 1920) (While the Home Rule Party was race-based, the Republican Party was not.)

For the entirety of the nineteenth century, non-whites always made up at least ninety percent of the population of the Islands. At the time of the 1893 coup, whites made up approximately six percent of Hawai‘i’s population and faced a much larger and engaged native populace. (Williams)

However, the level of Hawaiian participation in the initial Legislatures has shown that Hawaiians did not need the ‘Home Rule’ race-based party to get representation in the local legislature. After another decade of election losses, the Home Rule Party was disbanded after the election 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.)

Another proposed law “An Act providing for and creating certain counties in the Territory of Hawaii, and providing a form of government for such counties,” (as suggested in the initial paragraph, here.)

Various names were proposed for the counties, including, the Islands of Maui, Molokai, Lanai and Kahoʻolawe were to be called the County of Liliʻuokalani. Kauai and Niʻihau were to be called County of Lunalilo.

Oʻahu was to known as the County of Kalākaua; and the Island of Hawaiʻi was to have two counties: The County of Kauikeaouli (encompassing the districts of Hilo, Puna and Kaʻū) and the County of Kamehameha (encompassing the districts of Hāmākua, Kohala and Kona.) It, too, did not receive the Governor’s signature; Counties were later authorized in 1905.

In the end, only a small portion of the legislative agenda, nineteen bills, was passed by both houses and sent to the governor for his signature. (Williams)

They did pass a concurrent resolution on the final day of the session that included a memorial to the President of the United States asking for the removal of Governor Dole from office.

It charged that he had hindered the work of the session by his hostility toward the legislature, withheld vital information and reports that were called for, and refused to cooperate with lawmakers. (Williams)

The Hawaiian Star carried the official White House response, “The President (Roosevelt,) after most careful investigation and hearing as many men as possible (sic,) and hearing from others, has come to the conclusion that Governor Dole’s course has been such as to warrant his continuance as Governor of Hawai‘i and entitle him to the respect and hearty support of the Administration.” (Hawaiian Star, April 22, 1902)

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 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 1907 Legislature than the 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 was shown that Hawaiians did not need the ‘Home Rule’ race-based party to get representation in the local legislature. 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.) (The image shows a Hawai‘i legislative body (1900-1919, not necessarily the legislature of 1901.)

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook 

Follow Peter T Young on Google+ 

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn  

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

© 2016 Hoʻokuleana LLC

Early Territorial Legislature-1900-1919-PP-27-1-013-00001
Early Territorial Legislature-1900-1919-PP-27-1-013-00001

by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Kekāuluohi

Kekāuluohi, daughter and firstborn (July 27, 1794) of Kaheiheimālie and Kalaʻimamahu (Kamehameha’s younger half-brother,) was reared by her maternal grandparents, Namahana and Keʻeaumoku, who “fondled her as if she were a feather lei from the precious mamo bird.” (Luomala)

“Her grandfather, Keʻeaumoku, was the most noted of all the warriors of Kamehameha I, and by his personal prowess placed that eminent man on the throne of Hawaii; first by slaying with his own hand his great antagonist Kiwalaʻo, and subsequently Keōua, the only remaining enemy on that island.” (Jarves; The Friend)

Kekāuluohi was “a favorite above all the other grandchildren,” and was also the favorite of the uncles and cousins of her aunt Kaʻahumanu, her mother’s older sister and one of Kamehameha’s wives.

Kekāuluohi was looked on as the family head, and her father’s own trusted kahu and the latter’s kin were her caretakers.

“(S)he was betrothed in her youth to Pomare, the King of Tahiti, but his death prevented the union by marriage of the Kingdoms of the Hawaiian and Society Islands. She is reported to have been remarkably handsome in her youth, and as having possessed a very tenacious memory, treasuring up the old genealogies of the islands.” (Jarves; The Friend)

Kekāuluohi became Kamehameha’s youngest wife, cowife (punalua) with her mother, her mother’s sister, and other high-ranking chiefesses. After Kamehameha’s death his son Liholiho (Kamehameha II) took her as one of his wives. Around 1821 Kamehameha II gave Kekāuluohi to his friend Charles Kanaʻina.

Kekāuluohi succeeded her half-sister Kīna‘u as Kuhina Nui. Initially, she was considered something of a “place-holder” for Kīna‘u’s infant daughter Victoria Kamāmalu, who would later assume the office. (Archives)

“…The authority hitherto possessed by my mother Kaʻahumanu II. Until her decease is now transferred to my other mother (Miriam Kekāuluohi) though Victoria Kamehamalu II is her superior, but still under my direction.”

“Furthermore; no documents nor notes, referable to government, after this date, which have not my own signature, and also that of Miriam Kekāuluohi at the bottom of said writing will be acknowledged as government papers.” (Proclamation: Ke Kukala Ana a Ke Ali‘i, June 8, 1839; Archives)

“The person who attracted, our attention most, was Kekāuluohi. … She was altogether one of the most remarkable-looking personages I have ever seen.” (Wilkes, 1849)

“She lives in a grass-hut near the water, and has several chiefs in attendance on her: she appears to be a good-natured and contented person, and has adopted some foreign customs in her way of living.” (Wilkes, 1849)

“This lady is upwards of six feet in height; her frame is exceedingly large and well covered with fat. She was dressed in yellow silk, with enormously large gigot sleeves, and wore on her head a tiara of beautiful yellow feathers interspersed with a few of a scarlet colour.” (Wilkes, 1849)

“Above the feathers appeared a large tortoise-shell comb, that confined her straight black hair. Her shoulders were covered with a richly embroidered shawl of scarlet crape. She sat in a large arm-chair, over which was thrown a robe made of the same kind of yellow feathers as decked her tiara.” (Wilkes, 1849)

Kekāuluohi was a co-signer with Kamehameha III of Hawai‘i’s first Constitution in 1840, which provided for an elected representative body, a first step toward the common people gaining political power. The constitution also codified for the first time, the responsibilities and authority of the Kuhina Nui.

Other important events during Kekāuluohi’s tenure were the threats to Hawaiian sovereignty by the French and English. Soon after assuming her office in 1839, the French threatened war if Kamehameha III did not provide special privileges to the Catholic missionaries, repeal liquor laws and grant generous concessions to French citizens in Hawai‘i.

Then, in 1843, the infamous Charlton land claim resulted in the temporary loss of Hawaiian sovereignty when Lord George Paulet intervened and took possession of the Hawaiian Islands on behalf of the King of England. Richard Charlton was the British Consul in Honolulu who, in 1840, claimed valuable land based on dubious documentation and authority.

As the pressures of international diplomacy and economic development increased on the Hawaiian kingdom, it was necessary to structure the government for better administrative control. As her life came to a close, Kekāuluohi appointed Gerrit P Judd as Minister of the Interior to administer on her behalf. (Archives)

Kekāuluohi became a member of the Protestant church of the missionaries. “In the afternoon the congregation assembled again, a little earlier than the usual hour, and the church took their seats in order round the table of the Lord.”

“Kekauluohi first presented herself before the church and congregation, and, at her request, her desire to consecrate herself to God, and to obey the Gospel, was made known, and she was propounded for admission after further trial.” (Bingham)

“(I)n 1834, Miriam Kekāuluohi having, with her husband, Kanaʻina, built an elegant two story house of rock coral, near the mission houses, at Honolulu, received and entertained, one evening, at a well-furnished table, thirty-three missionaries, including men and women, presiding herself with the dignity of a Christian matron.”

“Kekāuluohi, having tried the routine of civilized domestic life, about two years, in her well finished and furnished habitation, received, at a Christian tea-party, the king, and some twelve or fourteen chiefs .… After tea, the company being conducted to the large upper drawing-room, united, as was customary, in a hymn and prayer.” (Bingham)

By Kanaʻina she had a son Prince William Charles Lunalilo, born on January 31, 1835; he succeeded Kamehameha V as king.

Kekāuluohi and Kanaʻina were the adoptive parents (kahu hānai) not only of Kalama, who became the wife of Kauikeaouli (Kamehameha III,) but of the royal couple’s second son. (Luomala)

Kekāuluohi died June 7, 1845. “She was a chiefess of the highest rank at the time of her death. Mr. Jarves in an obituary notice published in the Polynesian of June 21, 1845, writes thus:”

“She was the last adult member of that distinguished family which for the past sixty years has, as it were, shared the Hawaiian throne with the Kings themselves.” (Jarves; The Friend)

The Hawai‘i State Archives is located in the Kekāuluohi Building on the ʻIolani Palace Grounds just behind the Kanaʻina Building (Old Archives Building.)

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook 

Follow Peter T Young on Google+ 

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn  

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

© 2016 Hoʻokuleana LLC

Kekauluohi. Sketched by A. T. Agate; engraved by Welch and Walter
Kekauluohi. Sketched by A. T. Agate; engraved by Welch and Walter
Kekauluohi by Alfred Thomas Agate
Kekauluohi by Alfred Thomas Agate
Kekauluohi_1842_signature
Kekauluohi_1842_signature
Kekauluohi-WC
Kekauluohi-WC
Kekauluohi_(1864)
Kekauluohi_(1864)
Proclamation-by-Kamehameha-III-naming Kekauohi-Kuhina Nui
Proclamation-by-Kamehameha-III-naming Kekauohi-Kuhina Nui

by Peter T Young 1 Comment

Japan’s Hawaiian Protest

Sugar growers, who dominated the Hawaiian Islands’ economy, imported thousands of immigrant laborers first from China, then Japan. (Mintz & McNeil)

“Although the efforts of Hawai‘i to establish treaty relations with Japan met with success in 1871, no considerable number of Japanese immigrants arrived during the years immediately following. Primarily to offset the numerical preponderance of the Chinese plantation laborers, the Hawaiian Government signed an immigration convention with Japan in 1886.”

“With startling rapidity the islands were flooded with Japanese, whose numbers increased from 116 in 1883 to 24,407 in 1896, out of a total population of 109,020.” (Bailey)

“The great influx of Japanese into the Hawaiian Islands during the last several years and especially during the last few months is causing anxiety to the Hawaiian government and to Americans who favor the annexation of the islands to the United States.”

“According to the recent reports of Consul-General Ellis Mills, the Japanese rank second in numerical strength among the nations represented in the Hawaiian Islands.” (The Chautauquan, 1897)

“Faced with the prospect of domination at the hands of a foreign people, the Hawaiian government began as early as 1887 to take fruitless measures to stem this oriental inundation.”

“The situation finally became so desperate that her Hawaiian officials, alleging irregularities, refused admittance to 1,174 Japanese immigrants during March, 1897, and sent them back to Japan.” (Bailey)

“This threatened monopolization of power by the Japanese has been urged during the McKinley administration as a plea for the annexation of the islands by the United States. However, no occasion for special alarm occurred till early in April.” (The Chautauquan, 1897)

At the time, the Republic of Hawai‘i and the US were in discussions for annexation of the Islands by the US. Japan protested Hawaiian annexation.

“Japanese minister, Toru Hoshi, calls the attention of Secretary Sherman to the rumor that the governments of the United States and of Hawai‘i were upon the point of concluding a treaty of annexation, a rumor the circumstantiality of which had caused it to be the subject for an interview between them before the note was sent to the secretary.”

“In the note itself the minister stated that the Japanese government could not view without concern the prospects of a sudden and complete change in the status of Hawai‘i, whereby the rights of Japan and of Japanese subjects may be imperiled, and that while they confidently relied upon the United States to maintain towards them a just and friendly attitude …”

“… they felt that under the circumstances they could not be regarded as spectators merely, without interest in the important change which was about to be made. For these reasons the minister said he felt himself justified in inquiring of the secretary what provision had been made for the preservation and maintenance of the rights acquired by Japan under treaty.” (Los Angeles Herald, July 25, 1897)

At the time, the “Japanese in the islands with large property rights, and under the present conditions they are entitled to become citizens of Hawai‘i.”

“In case of annexation these Japanese could not become citizens of the United States, as the decisions of United States Circuit Courts are to the effect that no Asiatic can become a citizen of the United, States.”

“The Japanese base their opposition to annexation almost entirely upon the ground that it is an interference with the treaty rights of Japan and complain especially that the treaty was negotiated in the face of the most friendly protestations from Japan and at a time when the Japanese authorities had been led to believe that no such treaty would be undertaken.”

“The Japanese insist, as on all former occasions, that the Japanese Government has not now and never has had any designs against Hawai‘i. This they consider a most important point because of the talk about colonization which they say apparently has had so much weight in the discussions of the question.”

“They contend that the Japanese just went to Hawai‘i in response to the demands for labor in the islands under provision of a treaty concluded in 1886 at the solicitation of the Hawaiian Government.” (New York Times, June 27, 1897)

“Hawaiians in Washington insist that the reason for the protest of Japan against annexation is that Japan really desires to acquire the Islands herself.” (New York Times, June 25, 1897)

“The evident intention of Japan to take possession of the islands has caused some uneasiness in Washington among those who favor annexation, and it is said that prompt action should be taken by this Government to prevent such a calamity.”

“It is now known here that, notwithstanding the demands at the time concerning the reason of the Philadelphia’s hurried trip to Honolulu …”

“… that ship was really ordered there on account of news received from the American representative there calling attention to the floods of Japanese pouring into the country and the evident intention of the Japanese to overwhelm the other people there, both native and foreign.” (Sacramento Daily News, April 13, 1897)

“The Japanese assert that Hawai‘i took no steps to restrict immigration from Japan until last February, when a sudden and suspicious demand was made upon Japan to this end. This, it is claimed, is evidence sufficient that there is no flooding of the Island.”

“The Japanese regarded this demand from the island Government as capricious and concluded that it was made for increasing the agitation in the interest of annexation, and to furnish a pretext for speedy action in that direction.”

“In view of these explanations on their part to the United States, the Japanese complain of the suddenness of the announcement of the Hawaiian treaty of annexation, and say the treaty was consummated when they had reason from official assurances for believing that no hasty action in that direction was contemplated.” (New York Times, June 27, 1897)

US Secretary of State John Sherman relied to the Japanese protests saying, “What the Hawaiian treaty of annexation proposes is the extension of the treaties of the United States to the incorporated territory to replace the necessarily extinguished Hawaiian treaties in order that the guarantees of treaty rights to all may be unquestionable and continuous.”

“To this end the termination of the existing treaties of Hawai‘i is recited as a condition precedent. The treaty of annexation does not abrogate these instruments. It is the fact of the Hawai‘i’s ceasing to exist as an independent contract that extinguishes those contracts.”

“As to the vested rights, if any be established in favor of Japan and of Japanese subjects in Hawai‘i, the case is different, and I repeat that ‘there is nothing in the proposed treaty prejudicial to the rights of Japan.’”

“Treaties are terminable in a variety of ways; that of 1886, between Japan and Hawai‘i, to which your protest is supposed to relate, is by either party on six months’ notice, but its extension would no more extinguish vested rights, previously acquired under Its stipulations, than the repeal of a municipal law affects rights of property vested under its provisions.” (Pacific Commercial Advertiser, July 14, 1897)

“This reply of Secretary Sherman was not satisfactory to the Japanese government, for in three days thereafter the minister having communicated with the Japanese minister for foreign affairs In the meantime, he laid before the secretary his formal protest against the annexation of the islands.”

“The protest concluded with an emphatic and unequivocal repudiation of the suggestion or report that Japan had designs against the integrity or sovereignty of Hawai‘i and a declaration that Japan has not now and never had such designs or designs of any kind whatever against Hawai‘i.”

“In this shape the incident remains for the present. It is scarcely conceivable that the protest of Japan can have any appreciable effect upon the fate of the treaty.” (Los Angeles Herald, July 25, 1897)

With the country aroused by the Spanish American War and political leaders fearful that the Islands might be annexed by Japan, the joint resolution easily passed Congress. Hawai‘i officially became a US territory in 1900. (Mintz & McNeil)

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook 

Follow Peter T Young on Google+ 

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn  

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

© 2016 Hoʻokuleana LLC

Uncle Sam Hawaii Annexation Cartoon
Uncle Sam Hawaii Annexation Cartoon
Uncle Sam Annexation Cartoon
Uncle Sam Annexation Cartoon
Japanese Ambition
Japanese Ambition

by Peter T Young 1 Comment

Kuakini’s Cotton

“The pleasant village of Kailua is situated on the west side of Hawaii. It is the residence of the Governor of the Island. It is celebrated in Hawaiian history, as having been the residence for several years of Kamehameha I, and at this place he died, on the 8th of May, 1819, at the age of 66 years.”

“Here was first announced by Royal authority, that the old tabu system was at an end. It was in the quiet waters of this bay, that the brig Thaddeus anchored, April 4th, 1820, which brought the first Missionaries to the shores of Hawaii.”

“The natural features of the lofty mountain of Hualālai, and the rugged and rocky coast remain the same; but changes have been gradually going forward in the habits of the people and the appearance of the village.”

“There stands the village church with its tapering spire, almost a lac-simile of some that anciently stood in the centre of the common in many a New England village.”

“During the summer of 1844, we landed at Kailua to commence a tour of Hawaii. It was on the morning of the 1st of July, and we were kindly invited to take up our brief sojourn at the house of the Rev, Mr. Thurston who with his wife and children had been our voyaging companions on board the Clementine, from Honolulu.”

“The day of our landing happened to be the first Monday of the month, which has been so sacredly consecrated by American Missionaries and the churches of the United States, as a day of prayer for the blessing of God upon the Missionary enterprise.”

“It was pleasant to enjoy one of these sacred seasons, on the spot, so replete with incidents calculated to inspire the friend and lover of the cause with thanksgiving and gratitude. As might naturally be supposed, we had a ‘thousand’ inquiries to make of our venerable Missionary best, who bad been here watching the successive phases and changes of events for the last quarter of a century.”

“From our Journal for July 2d, we copy the following: ‘This morning it was proposed that we visit the village. Our steps were first directed to Governor Adams’ ‘factory,’ a long, and low, thatched building, now occupied as a native dwelling and store house.”

“Here the Governor undertook the manufacture of cotton cloth, and actually succeeded so far as to make several hundred yards.” (The Friend, April 15, 1845)

“Governor Kuakini indeed went so far as to manufacture a very stout kind of cloth in Kailua, Hawaii. It was proposed by the Rev. Mr. Armstrong that prizes in money and of sums which would make them worth contending for should be offered on a graduated scale for say, the three best specimens that may be exposed at the exhibition of this year.”

“It was asserted that this cotton raising is a business which will fall in with the habits of the people, and for which they have always evinced an inclination.” (Polynesian, June 11, 1859)

The cloth making experiment begun at Wailuku was continued; spinning and knitting were undertaken at one or two other stations; cotton growing was taken up by the church members at several places as a means of raising funds for new school and church buildings and to aid the missionary cause in general.

At Haiku, Maui, an American farmer commenced a small plantation, having 55 acres planted in 1838. Governor Kuakini of Hawaii. one of the most business-like of the chiefs, visited Miss Brown’s class at Wailuku in 1835 and conceived the idea of having the industry established on his island.

In 1837 the governor was reported by one of the merchants to have planted an immense cotton field at Waimea, Hawaii. In the same year he erected a stone building at Kailua, thirty by seventy feet, to be used as a factory. A foreigner in his employ made a wheel, from which as a sample the natives made about twenty others.

Wheel heads and cards were imported from the United States. Three poorly trained native women served as the first instructors for some twenty or thirty operatives, girls and women from twelve to forty years of age.

In a comparatively short time they acquired a fair proficiency in the work; by the middle of 1838 a large quantity of yarn bad been spun. Two looms were next procured and a foreigner familiar with their operation.

Members of the United States exploring squadron visited the factory in 1840, and the commander of the expedition wrote that the foreigner just mentioned ‘was engaged for several months in the establishment, during which time he had under his instruction four young men, with whom he wove several pieces of brown stripes and plaids, plain and twined cotton cloth.’

‘After this time, the natives were able to prepare and weave independently of his aid. Becoming dissatisfied, however, all left the work, together with the foreigner; but after some time they were induced to return to their work. This small establishment has ever since been kept up entirely by the natives.’ (Kuykendall)

Kuakini’s “scheme failed probably from the fact that the Governor found it cheaper to buy coarse cottons than to make them.” (The Friend, April 15, 1845)

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook 

Follow Peter T Young on Google+ 

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn  

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

© 2016 Hoʻokuleana LLC

'John Adams' Kuakini, royal governor or the island of Hawai'i, circa 1823
‘John Adams’ Kuakini, royal governor or the island of Hawai’i, circa 1823

by Peter T Young 5 Comments

Idlers

“Formerly, the chief could call the people from one end of the Islands to the other to perform labor. At the present time this is prohibited, and the people can be required to work only nearby their home.”

“Formerly, if the King wished the people to work for him, they could not refuse. They must work from month to month. So also at the call of every chief and every landlord.”

“At the present time there is nothing of the kind. If any chief should attempt to pursue such a course, it would be a crime such as would free all his tenants from laboring for him at all until the time specified in the law.”

“Formerly, the people were regularly required to work every Tuesday and Friday, that is four days in a month for the King and four for the landlord, eight in whole, and as many more as the chiefs chose. At the present time the whole number is limited to six days in a month, leaving twenty laboring days for the people.”

“Formerly, if the people did not go to the work of the King when required, the punishment was that their houses were set on fire and consumed. Now if they do not go, they must pay a rial, or at most a quarter of a dollar.”

“But still, the people are wailing on account of their present burdens.”

“Formerly, they were not called burdens. Never did the people complain of burdens till of late – till these dreadful weights mentioned above were removed. This complaint of the people however would have a much better grace, if they with energy improved their time, on their own free days, but lo! this is not the case.”

“They spend many of their days in idleness, and therefore their lands are grown over with weeds, and there is little food growing.”

“The chiefs of their own unsolicited kindness removed the grievous burdens mentioned above. The people did not first call for a removal of them. The chiefs removed them of their own accord.”

“Therefore the saying of some of the people, that they are oppressed, is not correct. They are not oppressed, but are idle.” (Laws of the Hawaiian Islands, 1842)

“As for the idler, let the industrious put him to shame, and sound his name from one end of the country to the other. And even if they should withhold food on account of his idleness, there shall be no condemnation for those who thus treat idlers.”

“If a landlord, or a chief should give entertainment to such a sluggard, he would thereby bring shame on the industrious. For three months the tenants of him who thus entertains the sluggard shall be freed from labor for their landlord. Such is the punishment of him who befriends the sluggard. Let him obtain his food by labor.” (Laws of the Hawaiian Islands, 1842)

“Indolence is a crime involving the best interests of the state. Even in days of old it was considered a crime, and at the present time it is perfectly clear that it is a downright misdemeanor. Those who live without labor live in direct disobedience to the commands of God, and in disregard of the opinions of mankind.”

“Wherefore, in a council or the Nobles and Representative Body, this law was passed.”

“1. If a man be often see running about, or sitting idly without labor, or devoted to play and folly, he shall be taken before the judges, and if he cannot bring evidence that he labors sufficiently to pay for his board and clothing, he shall then be put to hard labor for three months.”

“2. If he be again seen living in the idle manner after he has been punished, then he shall he put to hard labor for one year.”

“3. If a man live in idleness because he have no land, then his destitution shall be examined into, and if he be faultless he shall not be punished. But land shall be given him as the laws requite.”

“4. By this law, men and boys are forbidden to run in crowds after new things. Whosoever does this in an indecent manner shall be punished thus; he shall be taken to the house of confinement and remain till he pay a rial, and be set at liberty. The same also with those who obey not the police officer when he proclaims a prohibition.”

“It shall therefore be the duty of the police officers to watch carefully around the markets and places of public resort, that they may discover who they are who crowd after strangers, for these are indolent and lazy persons. Let them he taken before the judges and tried, and when convicted let them he punished according to the requirements of this law.”

“If this law he proclaimed in any village or district, the day of its proclamation shall be the day of its taking effect at that place, but even if it be not proclaimed, it shall nevertheless take effect on the first day of September of the present year, at all places of these Hawaiian Islands.”

“This law having received the approbation of the Nobles and Representative Body, we have hereunto set our names on this twenty-third day of April, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and forty-one, at Lahaina, Maui.” (Laws of the Hawaiian Islands, 1842)

The image is from the State Archives; it shows people at their home with a taro lo‘i. Their land is cared for (not grown over with weeds,) and there is ample food growing; according to the preambles and laws of the Kingdom, they are not idlers.

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook 

Follow Peter T Young on Google+ 

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn  

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

© 2016 Hoʻokuleana LLC

"The image is from the State Archives; it shows people at their home with a taro lo‘i. Their land is cared for (not grown over with weeds,) and there is ample food growing; according to the preambles and laws of the Kingdom, they are not idlers."
“The image is from the State Archives; it shows people at their home with a taro lo‘i. Their land is cared for (not grown over with weeds,) and there is ample food growing; according to the preambles and laws of the Kingdom, they are not idlers.”