Images of Old Hawaiʻi

  • Home
  • About
  • Categories
    • Ali’i / Chiefs / Governance
    • American Protestant Mission
    • Buildings
    • Collections
    • Economy
    • Missionaries / Churches / Religious Buildings
    • General
    • Hawaiian Traditions
    • Other Summaries
    • Mayflower Summaries
    • Mayflower Full Summaries
    • Military
    • Place Names
    • Prominent People
    • Schools
    • Sailing, Shipping & Shipwrecks
    • Voyage of the Thaddeus
  • Collections
  • Contact
  • Follow

July 22, 2016 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

Filed Under: Economy, Ali'i / Chiefs / Governance Tagged With: Kona, Maui, Kailua-Kona, Cotton, Hawaii, Hawaii Island, Kuakini

July 18, 2016 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.”

Filed Under: General, Ali'i / Chiefs / Governance, Hawaiian Traditions Tagged With: Hawaii, Idlers

July 16, 2016 by Peter T Young 1 Comment

Loch Na Garr

“Away, ye gay landscapes!
Ye gardens of rose …”

Wait … while those are the beginning lines of the Loch Na Garr poem by Lord Byron, cousin of the captain of the Blonde who brought the bodies of King Liholiho and Kamāmalu back to Hawaiʻi, after they died of measles in England (1824) …

… this story is not about that Loch Na Garr, nor is it about ‘gay landscapes’ nor ‘gardens of roses.’

But it is about a king, Kamehameha V, and a boat, the Loch Na Garr, and unfortunately its cargo – deer – that dastardly do-bad to landscapes and native plants on Molokai, Lānaʻi and, now, unfortunately, Maui.

“A gentleman residing on the upper Ganges, where these deer abound, offered to supply them for transportation here, when Dr. Hillebrand was in Calcutta, and at his suggestion that His Majesty was desirous to obtain them, this consignment was made to Hong Kong.”

“Three bucks and four hinds have arrived safely. They have been well cared for on the voyage by Capt. Baskfill, and are the finest as well as largest number of deer imported here at any one time. They have been delivered to the King and will be sent to Molokai.” (Hawaiian Gazette, December 17, 1867)

“These really beautiful animals, the spotted Indian deer brought by the Loch Na Garr, which lies at market wharf, have been visited by many of our residents the past week.”

“On Wednesday one of the hinds gave birth to a fine kid, as healthy and frisky as if born in his own mountain home. It is a male, and the officers of the ship have named him Kamehameha VI.” (Pacific Commercial Advertiser, December 21, 1867)

“They are the speckled Indian deer, a variety well adapted to domestication on our islands.” (Hawaiian Gazette, December 17, 1867)

“(S)even in number, a present from the Hawaiian Consul at Hong Kong to the King. Eight were put on board, but one has died. The remainder are in very fine condition, having apparently improved on the voyage.”

“Some of them are quite young, and the horns of the bucks are in the process of growth showing the manner in which these ornamental appendages are formed.”

“All the animals are as tame as pet kids, and will be shipped to Molokai, as soon as the King’s yacht is ready to take them aboard.” (Pacific Commercial Advertiser, December 14, 1867)

“(T)he deer will be transferred to the King’s yacht, and taken to Molokai, where we hope they will rapidly increase and stock the whole island.” (Pacific Commercial Advertiser, December 21, 1867)

As the property on Molokai belonged to King Kamehameha V, he placed a kapu (prohibition) on the deer. The deer increased under this protection. They sought the mountain areas as their habitat because they were crowded out by the large herds of cattle that ranged on the low lands. (Cooke)

In this highland area in thirty years the deer increased to a great number. The American Sugar Co, Ltd built a forest fence to keep the cattle from entering the forest. This however did not keep out the deer.

In November 1898, the sugar company hired two professional hunters from California to shoot off the deer. These men were engaged at forty dollars per month with perquisites and were allowed to sell the skins.

It is commonly reported that these two men, in the year in which they operated, killed between 3,500 and 4,000 deer. (Cooke)

Molokai was not the only island to get these deer. Shortly after Harry A Baldwin and his brother, Frank, had purchased the island of Lānaʻi from the Lānaʻi Company in 1917, they wished to stock that island with deer.

The Molokai folks sold them for $50 apiece. In lieu of ranch wages, cowboys captured and transported the deer for half the amount that the Baldwins would pay.

Twelve deer in all were captured. They were then loaded on to a truck, caged then sent over on a large sampan, “Makaiwa.” When near the shore of that island, the cage was opened and the deer allowed to swim ashore. (Cooke)

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

Deer on Molokai - Lanai
Deer on Molokai – Lanai

Filed Under: General, Ali'i / Chiefs / Governance, Economy Tagged With: Deer, Loch Na Garr, Hawaii, Maui, Lanai, Molokai, Kamehameha V

July 10, 2016 by Peter T Young 1 Comment

Broken Bones

The Chiefs’ Children’s School (The Royal School) was founded in 1839. The cornerstone of the original school was laid on June 28, 1839 in the area of the old barracks of ʻIolani Palace (at about the site of the present State Capitol of Hawaiʻi.)

The school was created by King Kamehameha III; the main goal of this school was to groom the next generation of the highest ranking chief’s children of the realm and secure their positions for Hawaii’s Kingdom.

Seven families were eligible under succession laws stated in the 1840 Constitution of the Kingdom of Hawai‘i; Kamehameha III called on seven boys and seven girls of his family to board in the Chief’s Children’s School.

The Chiefs’ Children’s School was unique because for the first time Aliʻi children would be brought together in a group to be taught, ostensibly, about the ways of governance.

Amos Starr Cooke (1810–1871) and Juliette Montague Cooke (1812-1896), missionaries from the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, were selected to teach the 16 royal children and run the school.

In this school were educated the Hawai‘i sovereigns who reigned over the Hawaiian people from 1855, namely, Alexander Liholiho (King Kamehameha IV,) Queen Emma, Lot Kamehameha (King Kamehameha V,) King William Lunalilo, King David Kalākaua and Queen Lydia Lili‘uokalani.

In addition, the following royal family members were taught there: Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop, Princess Elizabeth Kekaaniau Pratt, Prince Moses Kekuaiwa, Princess Jane Loeau Jasper, Princess Victoria Kamāmalu, Prince Peter Young Kaeo, Prince William Pitt Kīnaʻu, Princess Abigail Maheha, Prince James Kaliokalani and Princess Mary Polly Paʻaʻāina.

In a letter requesting the Cookes to teach and Judd to care for the children, King Kamehameha III wrote, “Greetings to you all, Teachers – Where are you, all you teachers? We ask Mr. Cooke to be teacher for our royal children. He is the teacher of our royal children and Dr. Judd is the one to take care of the royal children because we two hold Dr Judd as necessary for the children and also in certain difficulties between us and you all.”

But all were not always well. “On Saturday afternoon, when we returned from bathing David fell off his horse and broke his arm so I ran after his father and the Gov and Abigail’s mother came to see him and Dr Judd set it.” (Monday, July 29, 1844 entry in Prince Lot Kapuāiwa’s diary while at the Chiefs’ Children’s School)

Amos Cooke’s journal entry on the day of the accident explains what happened, “About 3 o’clock we went to bathe & all the boys went & I took special pains to wash them very clean.”

“We returned in very good spirits & most of us had reached home, but (David, written in different ink) came on behind & just as he was turning the last corner his horse jumped one side & threw him off, & broke his right shoulder bone near the elbow.”

“Dr Judd came in immediately & set it. His head was bruised some & so was one of his ankles. He now lies in the room occupied by Mr Sturges when he was here. The king & suite have not come to day as was expected.” (Amos Cooke Journal, July 27, 1844)

Cooke later noted, “… though the youngest boy, David, fell from his horse in July last and broke his right shoulder bone. During the setting of it, and also a resetting, he neither flinched nor shed a tear. (Letter Amos Cooke to Rev D Gree, March 22, 1845)

By the entries in Prince Lot’s journal, it appears the students of the Chief’s Childrens’ School (Royal School) regularly rode horses – typically before breakfast. And, Kalākaua was not the only one to fall and break a bone.

A month before Kalākaua’s fall, Prince Lot noted the third anniversary that Moses Kekūāiwa also “fell off from his horse and broke his arm”. (Prince lot, June 20, 1844 Journal entry)

The Cooke’s also experienced bone breaks; their daughter “Juliette has been so unfortunate as to break her arm 10 days since. She is still under some restraint – gets hurt frequently. Bears it very well.”

“It is no small affair to have a broken bone in the family, but I am so thankful that it is only her arm, her head and back being all safe that I have not felt like complaining. I feel more than common cheerfulness and gratitude.” (Amos Cooke Letter to his mother, August 27, 1847)

Another unidentified bone break happened later, “Juliette and our children are enjoying usual health. Our little scholar with a broken leg has nearly recovered. He hobbles about.” (Amos Cooke Letter to his mother, July 20, 1848)

There were some other close calls, “This afternoon, at recess, Jane & Abigail were swinging Emma & swung her so forcibly that she hit against the post & injured her hip & knee.”

“This evening sent for Dr Judd who says no bones are broken. This afternoon Dr Rooke sailed for Maui in the Kahaelaia & we hesitated about letting Emma go home until her mother came, & took her home.” (Cooke Journal, October 13, 1842)

While Cooke noted the student injuries, he was not immune to injury himself. “After dinner at 2 o’clock I started alone for Waialua. … I went several miles inland …. In going down a pale (pali) & getting back to the road I lost Wm’s poncho, & left word with an old woman if she found it to send it to Mr Bishop’s.”

“I rode on pleasantly until within 2 ½ or 3 miles of Waialua, & while descending a little, my horse galloping & my reins down & holding a parasol with both hands, the horse stumbled & rolled over throwing me off on the near side. It was all done in an instant & when I started up & found my left arm lame & fearing some accident I began to feel to see if any bones were broken.”

“None were broken but my left shoulder was dislocated. At first, I felt faint, but I soon slung my arm in a handkerchief got up on my horse & started for Mr Wilcox’s with a hope that he might be able to set it.” (Cooke Journal, August 12, 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

Photograph_of_the_Royal_School,_probably_after_1848
Photograph_of_the_Royal_School,_probably_after_1848

Filed Under: Ali'i / Chiefs / Governance, Schools Tagged With: Royal School, Broken Bones, Hawaii, Chief's Children's School

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

© 2016 Hoʻokuleana LLC

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

Filed Under: Ali'i / Chiefs / Governance Tagged With: Hawaii, Annexation, Newlands Resolution, Treaty, Cession, United States

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 131
  • 132
  • 133
  • 134
  • 135
  • …
  • 145
  • Next Page »

Images of Old Hawaiʻi

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

Info@Hookuleana.com

Connect with Us

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Recent Posts

  • Uncle Tom’s Cabin
  • Kanaʻina
  • FDR in Hawaiʻi
  • Pu‘ukoholā
  • Portuguese in Hawaiʻi
  • ʻŌpūkahaʻia Leaves Hawaiʻi
  • Moku

Categories

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

Tags

Albatross Al Capone Ane Keohokalole Archibald Campbell Bernice Pauahi Bishop Charles Reed Bishop Downtown Honolulu Eruption Founder's Day George Patton Great Wall of Kuakini Green Sea Turtle Hawaii Hawaii Island Hermes Hilo Holoikauaua Honolulu Isaac Davis James Robinson Kamae Kamaeokalani Kameeiamoku Kamehameha Schools Lalani Village Lava Flow Lelia Byrd Liberty Ship Liliuokalani Mao Math Mauna Loa Midway Monk Seal Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Oahu Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument Pearl Pualani Mossman Quartette Thomas Jaggar Volcano Waikiki Wake Wisdom

Hoʻokuleana LLC

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

Info@Hookuleana.com

Copyright © 2012-2024 Peter T Young, Hoʻokuleana LLC

Loading Comments...