Ali’i / Chiefs / Governance | Page 130

July 7, 2016 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Annexation Into US – Is A Treaty Required?

“There is no provision in the Constitution by which the national government is specifically authorized to acquire territory; and only by a great effort of the imagination can the substantive power to do so be found in the terms of any or all of the enumerated powers.”

“The United States has acquired territory through cession, purchase, conquest, annexation, treaty, and discovery and occupation. These methods are permissible under international law and have been approved by the Supreme Court.”

“The executive and the legislature have performed different roles in the acquisition of territory by each of these means. Unfortunately, the historical practice does not supply a precise explanation of where the Constitution places the power to acquire territory for the United States.” (Legal Issues Raised by Proposed Presidential Proclamation To Extend the Territorial Sea, October 4, 1988)

“In the Legal Tender Cases, Mr. Justice Strong, speaking for the majority of the court, said that the adoption of the first ten amendments indicated that in the judgment of those who adopted the Constitution there were powers created by it not specified nor deducible from, or ancillary to, any one specified power ‘but which grew out of the aggregate of powers conferred upon the government, or out of the sovereignty instituted.’”

“Mr. Justice Bradley in a concurring opinion characterized the United States as ‘a national government and the only government in this country having the character of nationality,’ and added:”

“Such being the character of the General government, it seems to be a self-evident proposition that it is invested with all those inherent and implied powers which, at the time of adopting the Constitution, were generally considered to belong to every government as such, and as being essential to the exercise of its functions.” (George Sutherland, Constitutional Power and World Affairs (1919))

“The power of congress to acquire new territory, either by conquest, purchase, or annexation, was much debated at the time of the acquisition of Louisiana from France, in 1803, and in a less degree in connection with the purchase of Florida and of Alaska.”

“It has now come to be recognized and established, rather by precedent and the general acquiescence of the people, than by any strict constitutional justification. In fact, the power cannot be derived from any narrow or technical interpretation of the constitution.”

“But it is necessary to recognize the fact that there is in this country a national sovereignty. That being conceded, it easily follows that the right to acquire territory is incidental to this sovereignty. It is, in effect, a resulting power, growing necessarily out of the aggregate of powers delegated to the national government by the constitution.” (Handbook of American Constitutional Law)

“Territory is acquired by discovery and occupation where no other recognized nation asserts sovereignty over such territory. In contrast, when territory is acquired by treaty, purchase, cession, or conquest, it is acquired from another nation.” (Footnote, Legal Issues Raised by Proposed Presidential Proclamation To Extend the Territorial Sea, October 4, 1988)

“We have acquired much territory under treaty provisions and by conquest, and in such case the acquisition may be regarded as incidental to the powers mentioned …”

“… but we have also acquired territory by original discovery and appropriation alone. Such is the fact with reference to a large portion of Oregon; and such is peculiarly the fact with reference to certain small islands of the sea— the so-called Guano Islands.” (George Sutherland, Constitutional Power and World Affairs (1919))

“An act of congress passed in 1856, declared that guano islands taken into possession and occupation by American citizens, might be declared by the President to be ‘appertaining to the United States.’” (Handbook of American Constitutional Law)

“An act of Congress provides for the acquisition by Executive proclamation of any islands valuable for their deposits of guano, discovered by citizens of the United States and not, at the time of discovery, occupied or possessed by any other government or its citizens.” (George Sutherland, Constitutional Power and World Affairs (1919))

“In regard to this statute, the supreme court has recently declared that ‘by the law of nations, recognized by all civilized states, dominion of new territory may be acquired by discovery and occupation, as well as by cession or conquest …”

“‘… and when citizens or subjects of one nation, in its name, and by its authority or assent, take and hold actual, continuous, and useful possession (although only for the purpose of carrying on a particular business, such as catching and curing fish, or working mines) of territory unoccupied by any other government or its citizens …’”

“‘… the nation to which they belong may exercise such jurisdiction and for such period as it sees fit over territory so acquired. This principle affords ample warrant for the legislation of congress concerning guano islands.’” (Handbook of American Constitutional Law)

In 1811, another annexation of foreign territory (West Florida) resulted from a Presidential Proclamation followed by an act of Congress (House and Senate participation.)

The Supreme Court, in speaking of the power of Congress to establish the Territorial Government in Florida until it should become a state, declared, “In the mean time, Florida continues to be a territory of the United States …”

“… governed by virtue of that clause in the Constitution, which empowers Congress ‘to make all needful rules and regulations, respecting the territory, or other property belonging to the United States.’”

“Perhaps the power of governing a territory belonging to the United States, which has not, by becoming a state acquired the means of self-government, may result necessarily from the facts, that it is not within the jurisdiction of any particular state, and is within the power and jurisdiction of the United States.”

“The right to govern, may be the inevitable consequence of the right to acquire territory. Whichever may be the source whence the power is derived, the possession of it is unquestioned.” (Canter Decision – Decision also cited in Dred Scott Decision)

Then, in Hawai‘i, “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.’ ‘That government sought annexation by the United States’ (Newlands Resolution).” (US Supreme Court)

“Then the provisional government grew into the constitutional Republic of Hawai‘i, and we have fully recognized that as the rightful and permanent government of Hawai‘i, and have kept our minister and consul-general at Honolulu and our war ships in that bay to protect them and the Republic….”

“No nation in the world has refused recognition of the Republic of Hawai‘i as the rightful Government, and none of them question its soverign [sic] right to deal with any question that concerns the people of Hawai‘i.” (Fifty-Fifth Congress, Second Session, Committee on Foreign Relations, March 16, 1898)

“This act also establishes the fact that a treaty with a foreign State which declares the consent of such State to be annexed to the United States, although it is rejected by the Senate of the United States, is a sufficient expression and authentication of the consent of such foreign State to authorize Congress to enact a law providing for annexation …”

“… which, when complied with, is effectual without further legislation to merge the sovereignty of such independent State into a new and different relation to the United States and toward its own people.” (Fifty-Fifth Congress, Second Session, Committee on Foreign Relations, March 16, 1898)

On May 5, 1898, Representative Francis Newlands, of Nevada, offered a joint resolution addressing the annexation of Hawai‘i. Though considerable opposition to annexation was still manifested in the House, the Newlands resolutions were finally passed.

The resolutions were immediately reported to the Senate, which had been discussing the treaty for nearly a year. That body referred them to its Committee on Foreign Relations, which in turn at once favorably reported them.

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.

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

Annexation-Here to Stay-PCA-July 14, 1898

July 5, 2016 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

“Call the little baby Kīna’u.”

“I was born in the ‘Old Mission House’ in Honolulu on the 5th day of July, 1831. When I was but a few hours old, ‘Kīna’u,’ the Premier, came into the bedroom with her crowd of ‘kahus,’ took me into her arms and said that she wanted to adopt me, as she had no girl of her own.”

“My mother, in her weak state, was terribly agitated, knowing that the missionaries were unpopular and entirely dependent on the good-will of the natives, so feared the consequences of a denial. They sent for my father in haste, who took in the state of affairs at a glance.”

“’We don’t give away our children,’ he said to Kīna’u. ‘But you are poor, I am rich, I give you much money,’ replied the Chiefess. ‘No, you can’t have her,’ my father answered firmly. Kīna’u tossed me angrily down on the bed and walked away, leaving my poor mother in a very anxious frame of mind.” (Wilder; Wight)

“She accordingly went away in an angry and sullen mood, and was not heard from until the infant was being christened a few weeks later, when she again appeared, elbowed the father to one side, and exclaimed in the haughtiest of tones, ‘Call the little baby Kīna’u.’”

“Fearing that a second refusal would result disastrously, the parents agreed, and the child was accordingly christened Elizabeth Kīna’u Judd.” (The Friend, May 1912)

Kīna’u “seemed somewhat appeased after the (christening) ceremony, and, as I was the first white girl she had ever seen, deigned from that time on to show a great interest in me, either visiting me or having me visit her every day.” (Wright, Wight)

Kīna’u, daughter of Kamehameha I, became a Christian in 1830. She succeeded her aunt Kaʻahumanu as Kuhina Nui upon the latter’s death in 1832.

She acted as the Regent for her brother Kauikeaouli when he became King Kamehameha III, from June 5, 1832 to March 15, 1833. She would rule with him until her death. She was responsible for enforcing Hawaiʻi’s first penal code, proclaimed by the king in 1835.

Gerrit and Laura Judd were in the 3rd Company of missionaries. In 1839, at the request of King Kamehameha, Judd, a physician, looked after the royal children in the Chiefs’ Children’s School.

Judd left the mission in 1842 and for the next 10+ years served the Kingdom in various positions, including translator, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Minister of Interior and Commissioner to France, Great Britain & US.

The Judd’s child was not the only missionary child named for Hawaiian Chiefs or Chiefesses.

Maria Kapule Whitney was born October 19, 1820 to the Pioneer Company missionaries/teachers, Samuel and Mercy Whitney. She was “the first haole girl to be born in the Hawaiian archipelago,” and named for Kauai Chiefess Kapule, wife of Kauai’s King Kaumualiʻi.

Maria went to the mainland at the age of six to be educated; she returned to the Islands with the 11th Company. She married bachelor missionary Reverend John Fawcett Pogue of the 11th Company.

Reportedly, the daughter of Samuel and Nancy Ruggles (missionaries/teachers of the Pioneer Company) born on December 22, 1820, was named Sarah Trumbull Kaumuali’i Ruggles. (Some suggest her Hawaiian name was Ka‘amuali‘i.)

The Whitneys and Ruggles escorted Humehume (Prince George,) King Kaumuali‘i’s son, back to Kauai, where they set up a missionary station.

Lucia Kamāmalu Holman was daughter of Thomas and Lucia Ruggles Holman of the Pioneer Company (Lucia was Samuel Ruggles sister.) Holman was the mission’s first physician and was stationed in Kona. She was born March 2, 1821 on Kauai and named after Queen Kamāmalu, King Kamehameha II’s wife.

Elisabeth “Lizzie” Kaahumanu Bingham was born March 8, 1829 in Honolulu to Reverend Hiram and Sybil Bingham, leaders of the Pioneer Company of missionaries. She was named after Queen Kaʻahumanu, favorite wife of King Kamehameha I and a friend of the mission.

In 1840, Lizzie returned to the mainland with parents and, after graduating from Mount Holyoke, taught on the continent. Lizzie returned to Hawai‘i in 1868 to work at Kawaiahaʻo Seminary (until 1880.) She died November 27, 1899 in Honolulu.

Mary Kekāuluohi Clark was born to Ephraim and Mary Clark (from the 3rd Company of missionaries) on September 20, 1829. She was named for Kekāuluohi, who later became Kuhina Nui (as Kaʻahumanu III;) Kekāuluohi was mother of King Lunalilo.)

Harriet Keōpūolani Williston Richards was born in 1829 to Reverend William and Clarissa Richards of the 2nd Company of missionaries. (Harriet was sent to the continent and lived with the Willistons; when her father died, she was adopted by the Willistons and took their name.)

Harriet was named for the mother of King Kamehameha II and III. When the 2nd Company arrived in the Islands (1822,) Richards and others escorted Keōpūolani to Lahaina where Richards was stationed. William Richards left the mission in 1838 at the request of King Kamehameha III to become the King’s translator, counselor and political advisor.

Douglass Hoapili Baldwin was son of Reverend Dwight and Charlotte Baldwin of the 4th Company of missionaries. He was born in 1840 and died in 1843; Hoapili was Governor of Maui and lived in Lahaina (where the Baldwins were stationed at the time of Douglas’ birth.

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

Elizabeth_Kinau_Judd-WC

Elizabeth_Kinau-1836

Kinau-Returning from Church-PP-98-2-007-1837

Gerrit and Laura Judd

Elizabeth Kaahumanu Bingham gravestone

Queen_Kaahumanu

Hiram and Sybil Bingham-1819

Maria Kapule Whitney Pogue

Samuel and Mercy Whitney-1819

Samuel and Nancy Ruggles-1819

Thomas and Lucia Holman

July 4, 2016 by Peter T Young 1 Comment

Independence Day

Independence Day celebrates the adoption of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, declaring independence from the Kingdom of Great Britain.

Drafted by Thomas Jefferson between June 11 and June 28, 1776, the Declaration of Independence is the nation’s most cherished symbol of liberty and Jefferson’s most enduring monument.

What Jefferson did was to summarize this philosophy in “self-evident truths” and set forth a list of grievances against the King in order to justify before the world the breaking of ties between the colonies and the mother country.

Fifty-six men from each of the original 13 colonies signed the Declaration of Independence – they mutually pledged “to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.”

Nine of the signers were immigrants, two were brothers and two were cousins. Eighteen of the signers were merchants or businessmen, 14 were farmers and four were doctors. Twenty-two were lawyers and nine were judges.

The average age of a signer was 45. Benjamin Franklin was the oldest delegate at 70. The youngest was Thomas Lynch Jr. of South Carolina at 27.

At the time of the signing, the American Revolutionary War was already underway (1775-1783.)

The British captured five signers during the war. Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward and Arthur Middleton were captured at the Battle of Charleston in 1780. George Walton was wounded and captured at the Battle of Savannah; Richard Stockton was incarcerated at the hands of British Loyalists.

Eleven signers had their homes and property destroyed. Francis Lewis’s New York home was razed and his wife taken prisoner. John Hart’s farm and mills were destroyed when the British invaded New Jersey, and he died while fleeing capture.

Fifteen of the signers participated in their states’ constitutional conventions, and six – Roger Sherman, Robert Morris, Benjamin Franklin, George Clymer, James Wilson and George Reed – signed the US Constitution.

Here are some other brief Revolutionary War highlights (and some Hawaiʻi July 4 events:)

1775
March 23 – Patrick Henry’s “Give me liberty or give me death” speech
April 18 – The rides of Paul Revere and William Dawes
April 19 – Minutemen and redcoats clash at Lexington and Concord “The shot heard round the world”
June 17 – Battle of Bunker Hill (Boston) – the British drive the Americans
Throughout the year, skirmishes occurred from Canada to South Carolina

Initially, fighting was through local militias; then, the Continental Congress established (on paper) a regular army on June 14, 1775, and appointed George Washington as commander-in-chief.

The development of the Continental Army was a work in progress, and Washington used both his regulars and state militia throughout the war.

1776
January 15 – Thomas Paine’s ‘Common Sense’ challenged the authority of the British government and the royal monarchy
March 17 – the British evacuate Boston

Ultimately, on September 3, 1783, the war ended with the signing of the Treaty of Paris. The treaty document was signed by John Adams, Benjamin Franklin and John Jay (representing the United States) and David Hartley (a member of the British Parliament representing the British Monarch, King George III).

On June 21, 1788, the US Constitution was adopted (with all states ratifying it by that time.)

John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and Charles Carroll were the longest surviving signers of the Declaration of Independence. Adams and Jefferson both died on July 4, 1826, the 50th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence; Carroll was the last signer to die – in 1832 at the age of 95.

On July 4, 1894, the Republic of Hawai‘i was established at Aliʻiolani Hale; Sanford B Dole became its first president.

On July 4, 1913, Duke Kahanamoku established three new West Coast records in swimming, winning the 50-yard, 440-yard and 220-yard races in a San Francisco regatta.

Following statehood of Hawaiʻi, the new flag of the United States of America, containing a union of 50 stars, flew for the first time at 12:01 am, July 4, 1960, when it was raised at the Fort McHenry National Monument in Baltimore, Maryland.

Attached is an image of the Declaration of Independence.

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

Declaration of Independence

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