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

April 18, 2018 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Joe the Statue Worshipper

“Honolulu like other and larger cities, has its street characters. They are, fortunately, but few, which fact renders them perhaps all the more familiar to residents and noticeable to strangers.” (Thrum)

“Jose de Medeiros, 1880(?)-1932, popularly known as ‘Joe the Statue Worshipper,’ kept an almost daily vigil in front of the Honolulu statue for about 35 years. In tattered clothes he would shuffle back and forth in front of the South Iolani Palace gate.”

“Sometimes he would cross the street to stare fixedly at the statue and go through various obeisances.” (Adler)

He “began his strange veneration in 1896, when he was sixteen. Daily he would appear in early morning before the monument.”

“He would shuffle back and forth or stand in apparent rapture staring at the bronze figure. He would depart in late afternoon.” (The Bend Bulletin, August 19, 1932)

“Once a reporter asked him if he liked to see Kamehameha every day, and he answered: ‘He step down some day. Then I see him.’”

“Joe became a familiar sight to townspeople, many of whom gave him gifts of clothes or food or cigars.”

“Former Mayor John H. Wilson remembered seeing him in front of the statue as early as 1896. By 1930 Joe was missing from his usual post, and it turned out he was sick. He died in July, 1932.”

“How account for his strange behavior? As a child of two, Joe came to Honolulu in 1882 with his Portuguese immigrant parents on the Earl of Dalhousie, the same ship that brought the damaged original statue. He may have been influenced by the awed superstition of the immigrants toward it, or by remarks of his parents.” (Adler)

“Old Joe, who truly was one of the extraordinary characters of the Pacific, possessed an endurance record that put in the shade the activities or such persons as marathon dancers, pole sitters, pie-eating champions and the like.”

“He stood voluntary guard before the gilded statue of Kamehameha the Great in the plaza between ‘Iolani Palace and the Judiciary Building, Honolulu for thirty-four years.”

“As to way he stood there day after day, year after year, no one ever found out.”

“That was the mystery of Joe.”

“All that the oldest residents of Honolulu ever knew Joe to say was that ‘Someday he step down – then we talk.’ The ‘he’ was the great bronze Kamehameha effigy of the first of the line of Hawaiian kings, the ‘Napoleon o’ the Pacific’ who united the group in government and whose intellect was said to have been proportionate to his mighty stature of seven feet.”

“Kamehameha reigned about the time the American Colonies were setting their faces against kings in general.”

“The gilt statue of the great king stands today in the middle of Honolulu and is the tribute of this age to a man whose tactful efficiency made a true golden one of his reign a century and a half ago.”

“Hence, the legend rose that perhaps Joe Medeiros. Whose family came from the Azores, was the reincarnation of some far-wandering Portuguese seaman who landed in Hawaii when Kamehameha was king and remained there to live and love as his heart dictated.”

“Some, however, said that the reason poor Joe stood there before the statue was that he in his youth on the Island of Hawai‘i had been kicked on the head by a calf.”

“For some years, Riley H. Allen, Editor of The Honolulu Star-Bulletin, as a test of ingenuity, would send new members of the staff from the mainland to interview old Joe.”

“But with one exception, there was uniform failure.”

“Joe would accept a cigar or maybe a half dollar, regard the donor tolerantly and return to his ‘job.’”

“Old Joe lived with his sister in that section of Honolulu between the palace and the Ala Moana, and, contrary to general opinion, he never married. He was fifty-two years old.” (Noted within Goodrich)

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook 

Follow Peter T Young on Google+ 

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn  

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

© 2018 Hoʻokuleana LLC

Joe the Statue Worshipper-Adler
Joe the Statue Worshipper-Adler
Joe the Statue Worshipper-PP-46-11-016-00001
Joe the Statue Worshipper-PP-46-11-016-00001

Filed Under: General, Ali'i / Chiefs / Governance, Prominent People Tagged With: Hawaii, Oahu, Kamehameha Statue, Jose de Medeiros, Joe the Stature Worshipper

April 16, 2018 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Bishop Restarick Takes Over Episcopal Church

“Not only did (the influence of Captain Vancouver) with Kamehameha lead the latter to consider the possibility of England’s protective and developing hand in the future of the Islands, but he was also led to welcome Vancouver’s promise that upon his approaching return to England he would use his influence to have Christian teachers sent to the Islands.”

“Vancouver made an effort to fulfill this promise; but on his return he found England occupied with European troubles, and he himself died soon after.”

The Islands were not left entirely without the ministry of the Church. Vancouver had discovered an English chaplain, one John Howell, whom he could commend to Kamehameha along with Isaac Davis and John Young. However, Howell’s stay in the Islands proved brief; he left in 1795.

Other English chaplains visited the Islands from time to time and it was one of these who, early in the 19th Century, celebrated the first Christian marriage according to the form of the Episcopal Church between James Young, the second son of John Young, and a daughter of Isaac Davis.

Vancouver’s promise was not forgotten; in November, 1823, Liholiho (Kamehameha II) sailed for England one of his purposes was to remind George IV of the English promise. Unfortunately, he contracted measles and died in England before he had even seen King George.

Missionaries did come … American Protestant missionaries were the first to arrive (in 1820). Then, early in July 1827, there arrived at Honolulu the French ship La Comete with a band of Roman Catholic missionaries. In 1852, the desire for the Episcopal Church was still alive.

Admirable as these efforts were in ministering to the foreign residents of Honolulu and in maintaining interest in the Church, no really effective or permanent work could be done without a resident Bishop.

Then, the Rev. Thomas Nettleship Staley, fellow of Queen’s College, Oxford, and a tutor of St. Mark’s College, Chelsea, was consecrated on December 15, 1861, as Bishop for Honolulu.

Bishop Staley reached Honolulu on Saturday, October 11, 1862. The Mission inaugurated by Bishop Staley was almost immediately incorporated as the Hawaiian Reformed Catholic Church.

A continual source of encouragement to Bishop Staley was the steadfast devotion of Kamehameha IV and Queen Emma to the Mission. Confirmed on November 28, 1862, the sovereigns gave generously of their time and influence.

Not infrequently they were sponsors in Baptism, and the King prepared an Hawaiian translation of the Book of Common Prayer. He also rendered invaluable service in assisting Bishop Staley in the preparation and delivery of his sermons in Hawaiian. (Anglican History)

“The establishment here of the Reformed Catholic Church was one of the visionary schemes of the late R. C. Wyllie and never met with the cordial support of English or American Episcopalians for the main object appeared transparent from the first to be political rather than religious.” (Restarick) Finally, in 1870. after seven years of effort, Bishop Staley felt obliged to resign.

When Kamehameha IV died on St. Andrew’s Day, 1863, it seemed fitting that the proposed Cathedral should be erected in his memory and dedicated to St. Andrew. On March 5, 1867, Kamehameha V laid the cornerstone

Unfortunately, Bishop Staley’s return to England brought the work to an end with only the choir and tower foundations completed. Nothing further was done for about a decade.

The stone which had been sent out from England was allowed to remain crated on the ground. The congregation seemed satisfied to continue worshipping in the small frame Pro-Cathedral which had served them since 1866.

Failing to secure an American Bishop, the English authorities then turned to a successful parish priest, the Rev. Alfred Willis, who accepted the call and was consecrated February 2, 1872, in Lambeth Chapel. In 1901, Bishop Willis resigned as the Bishop of Honolulu.

Then, “On April 16, 1902, there flashed across the Pacific a message for the House of Bishops, then meeting, which read: ‘Transfer made. Good feeling prevails. Cathedral unified.’”

“‘Seldom better property or promise to start Missionary District. Movement to provide house for new Bishop. Young Bishop would rally young lay helpers. Disastrous to delay election.’”

“In response to this urgent appeal, there was elected the next day, as the first American Bishop of the Hawaiian Islands, the Rev. Henry Bond Restarick, then rector of St. Paul’s Church, San Diego, California.”

“This event, as intimated by the cablegram, was not the beginning of the Church in Hawaii. Something had gone before”. (Protestant Episcopal Church, Department of Missions, 1927)

In 1920, Bishop Restarick, having undergone two serious operations and being quite ill, determined to resign. The House of Bishops accepted his resignation and chose as his successor the Rev. John D. La Mothe. Bishop La Mothe was consecrated on June 29, 1921, in the Church of the Ascension, Baltimore, and arrived in Honolulu on August 16.

Initially the church was called the Hawaiian Reformed Catholic Church but the name would change in 1870 to the Anglican Church in Hawai‘i.

In 1902 it came under the Episcopal Church of the US. Initially the church was called the Hawaiian Reformed Catholic Church but the name would change in 1870 to the Anglican Church in Hawai‘i. In 1902 it came under the Episcopal Church of the US.

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook 

Follow Peter T Young on Google+ 

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn  

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

© 2018 Hoʻokuleana LLC

Henry_Bond_Restarick
Henry_Bond_Restarick

Filed Under: General, Ali'i / Chiefs / Governance, Missionaries / Churches / Religious Buildings, Prominent People Tagged With: Anglican Church, Hawaiian Reformed Catholic Church, Henry Bond Restarick, Hawaii, Kamehameha IV, Queen Emma, Episcopal

April 14, 2018 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Protection of Traditional & Customary Practices

Several Supreme Court Cases have reviewed and clarified Native Hawaiian rights to Traditional & Customary practices. The Court noted:

“Our proud legal tradition in this State of protecting Native Hawaiian rights is not of recent vintage, for even as far back as the days of the Hawaiian Kingdom, protections have been in place to ensure the continued exercise of traditional Hawaiian rights amidst the pressures exerted by countervailing interests of a changing society.

“[A number of legal cases have been appealed to the Hawai‘i Supreme Court. Decisions by the Court in those cases have defined, explained and clarified. The Supreme Court’s] “evolving jurisprudence concerning Native Hawaiian traditional and customary rights has conceived of a system in which the State and its agencies …”

“… bear an affirmative constitutional obligation to engage in a meaningful and heightened inquiry into the interrelationship between the area involved, the Native Hawaiian practices exercised in that area, the effect of a proposed action on those practices, and feasible measures that can be implemented to safeguard the vitality of those practices.”

“When an individual of Native Hawaiian descent asserts that a traditionally exercised cultural, religious, or gathering practice in an undeveloped or not fully developed area would be curtailed by the proposed project, the State or the applicable agency is “obligated to address” this adverse impact …”

“Consequently, if customary and traditional Native Hawaiian practices are to be meaningfully safeguarded, “findings on the extent of their exercise, their impairment, and the feasibility of their protection” are paramount. … To effectively render such findings, it is imperative for the agency to receive evidence and then make “[a] determination … supported by the evidence in the record.” (Pollack, SCAP-14-0000873 2015:3-10)

Following are some of the cases that address Native Hawaiian rights to traditional and customary practices.

Oni v Meek (1858)

In 1858, Oni, a tenant of the ahupua‘a of Hono‘uli‘uli, O‘ahu, filed suit against John Meek, who had a lease over the entire ahupuaʻa. Oni brought suit when some of his horses, which had been pastured on Meek’s land, were impounded and sold.

Oni claimed that he had a right to pasture his horses on the land division as one of his traditional tenant rights (by custom and by language in the Kuleana Act).

On September 22, 1858, the Police Court of Honolulu rendered a judgment for Oni. Meek was ordered to pay $80.00 for two horses and $4.00 in court costs. At the request of the defendant (Meek), the case was appealed to the Hawai‘i Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court was concerned with the right of a private property owner to use the land as he individually wished without having to share its use. The court said “the custom contended for is so unreasonable, so uncertain, and so repugnant to the spirit of the present laws, that it ought not to be sustained by judicial authority.”

The court also said “…it is perfectly clear that, if the plaintiff (Oni) is a hoaʻāina, holding his land by virtue of a fee simple award from the Land Commission, he has no pretense for claiming a right of pasturage by custom.” (Judicial History Center) The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Meek.

Common Law – Hawaiian Usage (1892)

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

Act to Reorganize the Judiciary Department, ch. LVII, § 5, 1892 Laws of Her Majesty Lili‘uokalani, Queen of the Hawaiian Islands, provided for exceptions to the English common law that were “established by Hawaiian national usage.” (McGregor & MacKenzie)

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

State Constitutional Amendments (1978)

In 1978, the State convened a historic constitutional convention that included recommendations that reaffirmed its commitment to Native Hawaiian interests and values.

The 1978 Constitutional Convention recognized the need to “preserve the small remaining vestiges of a quickly disappearing culture [by providing] a legal means … to recognize and reaffirm native Hawaiian rights.”

“The State reaffirms and shall protect all rights, customarily and traditionally exercised for subsistence, cultural and religious purposes and possessed by ahupua’a tenants who are descendants of native Hawaiians who inhabited the Hawaiian Islands prior to 1778, subject to the right of the State to regulate such rights.” (Hawaiʻi Constitution, Section 7)

Kalipi v Hawaiian Trust Co (1982)

In 1982, plaintiff William Kalipi, a Moloka‘i taro farmer, sought access to private land in order to gather “ti leaf, bamboo, kukui nuts, kiawe, medicinal herbs and ferns.”

The Hawai‘i Supreme Court held that “lawful occupants of an ahupua‘a may, for the purposes of practicing native Hawaiian customs and traditions, enter undeveloped lands within the ahupua‘a to gather those items enumerated in HRS § 7-1.” (Belatti & Garcia)

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

“This, however, is not to say that we find that all the requisite elements of the doctrine of custom were necessarily incorporated in § 1-1. Rather, we believe that the retention of a Hawaiian tradition should in each case be determined by balancing the respective interests and harm once it is established that the application of the custom has continued in a particular area.” (Hawaiʻi Supreme Court, Kapili, 656 P.2d 745 (1982))

Public Access Shoreline Hawai‘I (PASH) v Hawai‘i Planning Commission (1995)

In PASH, developer Nansay Hawai‘i, Inc. applied to the Hawai‘i County Planning Commission for a Special Management Area permit to develop a resort community covering over 450 acres of shoreline area on the Big Island of Hawai‘i.

The Hawaiʻi Supreme Court explained in PASH case that “the State’s power to regulate the exercise of customarily and traditionally exercised Hawaiian rights … necessarily allows the State to permit development that interferes with such rights in circumstances. Nevertheless, the State is obligated to protect the reasonable exercise of customarily and traditionally exercised rights of Hawaiians.”

In PASH, the court reaffirmed the State’s affirmative duty to protect customary rights as it regulates the development of land “previously undeveloped or not yet fully developed” in Hawai‘i. The court admonished State agencies, stating that they “[do] not have the unfettered discretion to regulate the rights of ahupua‘a tenants out of existence”.

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

Pele Defense Fund v Paty (1992)

Plaintiff Pele Defense Fund challenged the exchange of more than 27,000 acres of public lands, including areas designated as Natural Area Reserve lands, between the State and a private landowner.

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

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

“…The hunting and gathering patterns in the Puna district are unique because they are influenced, to a large extent, by an active volcano, Kīlauea. It can be reasonably inferred that volcanic eruptions in the Puna area force hunters and gatherers to change areas to find plants and animals for subsistence purposes.” (Circuit Court of the Third Circuit, Civil No. 89-089 2002)

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

Water Use Permit Applications (2000)

“The Waiāhole Ditch System collects fresh surface water and dike-impounded ground water from the Koʻolau mountain range on the windward side of the island of Oʻahu and delivers it to the island’s central plain.”

“Beginning in Kahana Valley, the collection portion of the system proceeds along the windward side of the Koʻolaus, then passes under the Koʻolau crest to the leeward side at the North Portal. … The ditch system was built in significant part from 1913 to 1916 to irrigate a sugar plantation owned and operated by Oʻahu Sugar Company, Ltd. (OSCo).”

“Diversions by the ditch system reduced the flows in several windward streams, specifically, Waiāhole, Waianu, Waikāne, and Kahana streams, affecting the natural environment and human communities dependent upon them.”

“Diminished flows impaired native stream life and may have contributed to the decline in the greater Kāneʻohe Bay ecosystem, including the offshore fisheries. The impacts of stream diversion, however, went largely unacknowledged until, in the early 1990s, the sugar industry on Oʻahu came to a close.”

In 2000, the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court noted “we continue to uphold the exercise of Native Hawaiian and traditional and customary rights as a public trust purpose. … [T]he mandate of ‘conservation’-minded use subsumed in our state’s water resources trust contemplates ‘protection’ of waters in their natural state as a beneficial use. … [T]his state bears an additional duty under Article XII, section 7 of its constitution to protect traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights.”

Ka Pa‘akai o ka ‘Āina v Land Use Commission (2000)

In the dispute before the LUC, Native Hawaiian community organizations opposed the re-classification of over 1,000-acres from conservation to urban lands for the Ka‘ūpūlehu Resort Expansion, a luxury development project on the island of Hawai‘i.

Within the reclassified lands, the Court noted that the coastal point known as Kalaemanō and the historic 1800-1801 Ka‘ūpūlehu Lava Flow were two well-known physical features associated with native Hawaiian culture and history. The Court also noted the association of two historical figures to the petition area, Kame‘eiamoku and Kamanawa, two chiefs who served as advisers to Kamehameha I.

The Court reaffirmed special protections for Native Hawaiian cultural practices when it ruled that the State Land Use Commission (LUC) failed to satisfy its statutory and constitutional obligations to preserve and protect customary and traditional rights of Native Hawaiians.

Ultimately, the Court held that the LUC’s determinations were “insufficient to determine whether [the LUC] fulfilled its obligation to preserve and protect customary and traditional rights of native Hawaiians.”

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook 

Follow Peter T Young on Google+ 

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn  

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

© 2018 Hoʻokuleana LLC

Hawaii Supreme Court
Hawaii Supreme Court
Oni v Meek (Hawaiʻi Judiciary)
Oni v Meek (Hawaiʻi Judiciary)
Bill Paty signing 1978 Con Con Document (Honolulu Advertiser)
Bill Paty signing 1978 Con Con Document (Honolulu Advertiser)
Pele Defense-Wao Kele o Puna Geothermal Well (WKOP Transfer Celebration)
Pele Defense-Wao Kele o Puna Geothermal Well (WKOP Transfer Celebration)
PASH-Kohanaiki Beach Park (Live in Hawaiʻi)
PASH-Kohanaiki Beach Park (Live in Hawaiʻi)
Waterfall believed to be at Waiāhole (CWRM)
Waterfall believed to be at Waiāhole (CWRM)

Filed Under: Ali'i / Chiefs / Governance, Hawaiian Traditions Tagged With: Public Access Shoreline Hawaii, Water Use, Ka Paakai o ka Aina, Hawaii, Common Law, PASH, Pele Defense Fund, Traditional and Customary Practices, Oni v Meek, Constitutional Amendments, Kalipi v Hawaiian Trust

April 11, 2018 by Peter T Young 2 Comments

‘Upolu

In 1779, Captain Cook explored the North Kohala area and noted: “The country, as far as the eye could reach, seemed fruitful and well inhabited … (3 to 4-miles inland, plantations of taro and potatoes and wauke are) neatly set out in rows.”

“The walls that separate them are made of the loose burnt stone, which are got in clearing the ground; and being entirely concealed by sugar-canes planted close on each side, make the most beautiful fences that can be conceived …” (Cook Journal)

“The district of Kohala is the northernmost land area of the island of Hawaii. ‘Upolu Point, its northwesterly projection, fronts boldly out into Alanuihaha Channel toward the southeastern coast of Maui, and is the nearest point of communication between the two islands.”

“To the south, along Hawai‘i’s western coast, lies Kona; to the east the rough coast of Hāmākua District unprotected from the northerly winds and sea.” (Handy & Pukui)

“Kohala was the chiefdom of Kamehameha the Great, and from this feudal seat he gradually extended his power to embrace the whole of the island, eventually, gaining the suzerainty of all the Hawaiian Islands.”

“’Upolu, which is the old name of the valley in Tahiti now called Papeno‘o; likewise the old name of the island of Taha‘a, northwest of Tahiti, and the present name of the chief island of the Samoan group.” (Handy & Pukui)

Oral traditions trace the origin of Hawaiian luakini temple construction to the high priest Pā‘ao, who arrived in the islands in about the thirteenth century. He introduced several changes to Hawaiian religious practices that affected temple construction, priestly ritual, and worship practices.

“Pā‘ao is said to have made his first landfall in the district of Puna, Hawaii, where he landed and built a Heiau (temple) for his god and called it Waha‘ula.”

“From Puna Pā‘ao coasted along the shores of the Hilo and Hāmākua districts, and landed again in the district of Kohala, on a land called Pu‘uepa, near the north-west point of the island, whose name, ‘Lae Upolu,’ was very probably bestowed upon it by Pā‘ao or his immediate descendants in memory of their native land.” (Fornander)

“In this district of Hawaii Pā‘ao finally and permanently settled. Here are shown the place where he lived, the land that he cultivated, and at Pu‘uepa are still the ruins of the Heiau of Mo‘okini, which he built and where he officiated.”

Mo‘okini temple was last active as a war temple for Kamehameha I in the last two decades of the 18th century. It is said to have housed the Kamehameha family war god, Ku-ka-‘ili-moku, and this feathered god transferred to Pu‘ukohola Heiau, in 1791, when Kamehameha built this new war temple to assure his conquest of all the Hawaiian Islands.

According to Stokes, Mo‘okini Heiau was said to have been built from stones brought from Pololu Valley. It was believed that the stones were passed hand-to-hand by men standing in a line spanning the 15-mile distance from the valley.

“About 2,000 feet west of Mo‘okini Heiau and near the ocean is the birthplace of Kamehameha the Great. At the time of his birth, ca. 1753, the site was occupied by one of the thatched housing complexes of Alapa‘i-nui-a-Kauaua, ruling chief of the Island of Hawai’i.”

“The birth itself took place late at night within d one of the large thatched houses reserved for royal women. The named stone Pohaku-hanau-ali‘i may have been his mother’s couch inside the house.”

“Alapa‘i’s housing complex would have included a number of thatched houses as well as the canoe landing ‘harbor’ along the shore. The complex, with ‘harbor’ was called by the place name of Kapakaj, within the larger Hawaiian land division (an ahupua‘a) called Kokoiki.” (NPS)

By the time of contact, numerous coastal villages and extensive dryland agricultural systems were in place in North Kohala. This farming system lasted for several centuries and provided taro and sweet potato (the food staples of the time) to the growing population.

When that ended in the 1800s, it was followed several decades later with the commercial production of sugarcane that lasted for over 100‐years. Sugar production stopped in Kohala in 1975.

On June 25, 1927, an Executive Order set aside nearly 38-acres of the property for an airplane landing field for the US Air Service to be under the management and control of the War Department. In 1933, the Army named it Suiter Field, in honor of 1st Lieutenant Wilbur C Suiter who was killed in action serving in 135th Aero Squadron.

Suiter Field was first licensed in 1928. It was also alternatively referred to as Upolu Point Military Reservation, Upolu Landing Field, Upolu Airplane Landing Field and Upolu Airport.

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook 

Follow Peter T Young on Google+ 

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn  

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

© 2018 Hoʻokuleana LLC

Kamehameha Birth Site
Kamehameha Birth Site
Mookini Heiau
Mookini Heiau
Upolu Point Field, Hawaii, February 3, 1929
Upolu Point Field, Hawaii, February 3, 1929
Upolu Point Landing Field-hawaii-gov)-1933
Upolu Point Landing Field-hawaii-gov)-1933
Upolu Airport-(hawaii-gov)-September 20, 1944
Upolu Airport-(hawaii-gov)-September 20, 1944
Upolu Air Field-(hawaii-gov)-August 13, 1945
Upolu Air Field-(hawaii-gov)-August 13, 1945
Upolu Point-(hawaii-gov)-1955
Upolu Point-(hawaii-gov)-1955
Upolu Airport-(hawaii-gov)-May 9, 1973
Upolu Airport-(hawaii-gov)-May 9, 1973
Upolu_Point-(hawaii-gov)-October 24, 1973
Upolu_Point-(hawaii-gov)-October 24, 1973

Filed Under: Place Names, Ali'i / Chiefs / Governance, Economy, Hawaiian Traditions, Military Tagged With: Hawaii, Paao, Kohala, North Kohala, Upolu Airport, Upolu Point, Kamehameha, Upolu, Mookini

April 10, 2018 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Aliʻi Letters John Papa Ii to Amos Cooke April 10, 1843

Hawaiian Mission Houses Historic Site and Archives (Mission Houses) collaborated with Awaiaulu Foundation to digitize, transcribe, translate and annotate over 200-letters written by 33-Chiefs.

The letters, written between 1823 and 1887, are assembled from three different collections: the ABCFM Collection held by Harvard’s Houghton Library, the HEA Collection of the Hawaii Conference-United Church of Christ and the Hawaiian Mission Children’s Society.

These letters provide insight into what the Ali‘i (Chiefs) were doing and thinking at the time, as well as demonstrate the close working relationship and collaboration between the aliʻi and the missionaries.

In this letter, John Papa ʻĪʻī writes to Amos and Juliette Cooke at the Chief’s Children’s School in Honolulu, informing them about things in Lahaina, where he and Dr. Judd are traveling with students from the school.

John Papa ʻĪʻī began his service in the royal court when he served as an attendant to Liholiho, Kamehameha II. Īʻī later became a trusted advisor and chief in the court of Kauikeaouli, Kamehameha III and continued to serve the sovereigns of Hawaiʻi until his death in 1870. At the time of this letter, he is escorting the boys from the Chiefs’ Children’s School as they travel in Lahaina.

Mr. Amos Starr Cooke was a missionary with the eighth company. He and his wife, Juliette Montague Cooke, ran the Chiefs’ Children’s School. Sarai, the wife of John Papa ‘Ī‘ī at the time of this letter, assisted at the Chiefs’ Children’s School.

In part, the letter notes:

“Wainee, April 10, 1843”

“Greetings to you two, Mr. and Mrs. Cooke,”

“Because we are apart these days, unable to converse one mouth to another, it is necessary to clarify by letter the various aspects of our stay. Because of that, I am informing you about us and the boys of ours.”

“From the first day of our stay here until now, it has been as it is when we all stay together, either there or here. They do not resist, and they are not a burden; our stay here is pleasant.”

“The domicile is peaceful, staying here at the house and going to the ocean to swim last Saturday, horseback riding that evening, and going to church yesterday.”

“The boys went to English-language services twice, all of us in the morning and then just Dr. Judd and the four boys went again.”

“And that night we sailed to the ship, the four boys and the two of us. Dr. Judd took over Sunday School. We saw someone talking with Dr. Judd, possible help for all of us, however it was not clear. …”

“We miss you folks very much and pray to God on your behalf, to help you folks and us as well. Much affection to the two of you and the young girls”.

Here’s a link to the original letter, its transcription, translation and annotation (scroll down):
https://hmha.missionhouses.org/files/original/77b4e4f2532453409fd570f4b9a498c5.pdf

On October 23, 1819, the Pioneer Company of American Protestant missionaries from the northeast US, led by Hiram Bingham, set sail on the Thaddeus for the Sandwich Islands (now known as Hawai‘i.) They arrived in the Islands and anchored at Kailua-Kona on April 4, 1820.

Over the course of a little over 40-years (1820-1863 – the “Missionary Period”,) about 180-men and women in twelve Companies served in Hawaiʻi to carry out the mission of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions (ABCFM) in the Hawaiian Islands.

One of the earliest efforts of the missionaries, who arrived in 1820, was the identification and selection of important communities (generally near ports and aliʻi residences) as “stations” for the regional church and school centers across the Hawaiian Islands.

Hawaiian Mission Houses’ Strategic Plan themes note that the collaboration between Native Hawaiians and American Protestant missionaries resulted in the
• The introduction of Christianity;
• The development of a written Hawaiian language and establishment of schools that resulted in widespread literacy;
• The promulgation of the concept of constitutional government;
• The combination of Hawaiian with Western medicine, and
• The evolution of a new and distinctive musical tradition (with harmony and choral singing).

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook 

Follow Peter T Young on Google+ 

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn  

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

© 2018 Hoʻokuleana LLC

Ii to Cooke April 10, 1843-1
Ii to Cooke April 10, 1843-1
Ii to Cooke April 10, 1843-2
Ii to Cooke April 10, 1843-2

Filed Under: Missionaries / Churches / Religious Buildings, Schools, Ali'i / Chiefs / Governance Tagged With: Hawaii, Amos Cooke, John Papa Ii, Chiefs, Chiefs Letters, Alii Letters Collection

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 89
  • 90
  • …
  • 144
  • 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

  • Valentine’s Day
  • Louis Henri Jean Charlot
  • Greek Artillery
  • Land Divisions
  • Fueling the Forces
  • Keʻelikōlani
  • “It was like laying a corner stone of an important edifice for the nation.”

Categories

  • Mayflower Summaries
  • American Revolution
  • General
  • 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

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...