Images of Old Hawaiʻi

by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Overthrow

Some suggest the overthrow of the Hawai‘i constitutional monarchy was neither unexpected nor sudden.

Dissatisfaction with the rule of Kalākaua and Lili‘uokalani initially led to the ‘Bayonet Constitution,’ then, the overthrow. “(M)ounting dissatisfaction with government policies and private acts of officials led to the formation of the Hawaiian League, a group of Honolulu businessmen.” (Forbes)

Challenges with Kalākaua
• Polynesian Confederacy
• “(Gibson) discerned but little difficulty in the way of organizing such a political union, over which Kalākaua would be the logical emperor, and the Premier of an almost boundless empire of Polynesian archipelagoes.” (Daggett; Pacific Commercial Advertiser, February 6, 1900)

Opium License Bribery Case
• 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.” (Hawaiian Gazette, May 17, 1887)

Extravagance/Debt
• Although Kalākaua had been elected and serving as King since 1874, upon returning from a trip around the world (1881), it was determined that Hawaiʻi’s King should also be properly crowned.
• “ʻIolani Palace, the new building of that name, had been completed the previous year (1882), and a large pavilion had been erected immediately in front of it for the celebration of the coronation. This was exclusively for the accommodation of the royal family; but there was adjacent thereto a sort of amphitheatre, capable of holding ten thousand persons, intended for the occupation of the people.” (Liliʻuokalani)

Bayonet Constitution (1887)
• In 1887, the struggle for control of Hawaiʻi was at its height with David Kalākaua on the throne. But some of the businessmen were distrustful of him. “So the mercantile element, as embodied in the Chamber of Commerce, the sugar planters, and the proprietors of the ‘missionary’ stores, formed a distinct political party, called the ‘down-town’ party, whose purpose was to minimize or entirely subvert other interests, and especially the prerogatives of the crown, which, based upon ancient custom and the authority of the island chiefs, were the sole guaranty of our nationality.” (Liliʻuokalani)

Concern with Lili‘uokalani’s Attempt to Rewrite the Constitution
• “When Lili‘uokalani became Queen, she took the following oath: ‘I solemnly swear in the presence of Almighty God, to maintain the Constitution of the Kingdom whole and inviolate, and to govern in conformity therewith.’” (UH Law School)
• “On January 14, 1893, Lili‘uokalani was prepared to ignore the constitutionally mandated approval-by-two-successive Legislatures process for amending the 1887 Constitution by announcing a new constitution in place of Kalākaua’s 1887 Constitution.” (UH Law School)
• “She did not do so because the Cabinet she appointed on January 13, 1893, refused her authorization request. The members of that Cabinet were Samuel Parker, William Henry Cornwell, Jr,, Arthur P. Peterson and John Colburn. Parker was a Native Hawaiian.” (UH Law School)

Some Native Hawaiian Dissatisfaction with the Acts of Kalākaua and Lili‘uokalani
• Robert W Wilcox – the man who figured so prominently & conspicuously in the revolution of 1889 (All quotes from Wilcox, Morgan Report)
o “Queen Lili‘uokalani brought these evils upon herself and the country both by her personal corruption, and that of her Government.”
o “I believe that if we can be annexed to the United States, the rights of all of our citizens, and especially those of the native Hawaiians, will be protected more carefully than they have ever been under the monarchy.”
o “They are naturally somewhat prejudiced against (the Provisional Government), as monarchy is the only form of Government with which they are familiar, but this feeling will quickly wear away as the Hawaiians are led to see that the Government is friendly to them and their interests. They already have confidence in the integrity and patriotism of President Dole.
o “I have repeatedly (advocated annexation to the United States) in public meetings held in this city. … but I am compelled to move cautiously or I shall lose my influence over them. I believe I am doing a good work by constantly conversing with them on the subject.”
o “I have told my countrymen that the monarchy is gone forever, and when they ask me what is the best thing to follow it I tell them annexation, and I firmly believe that in a very short time every Hawaiian will be in favor of that step.” (Robert W Wilcox – the man who figured so prominently & conspicuously in the revolution of 1889; Morgan Report)

Repeated Changes in Cabinet Ministers in the Kalākaua and Lili‘uokalani Reigns
• “Under every constitution prior to 1887 the ministers were appointed by the King and removed by him; but until Kalākaua’s reign it was a very rare thing that any King changed his ministry. They had a pretty long lease of political life.” (Judd; Blount Report)
• “It was a very rare political occurrence, and made a great sensation when a change was made.” (Judd; Blount Report) if

January 14, 1893 Lili‘uokalani’s Ministers Refused to Support Her Constitution – Threats of Bloodshed were Made Against Her Cabinet Ministers
• “The Queen retired to the blue room and summoned the ministers (Samuel Parker – Minister of Foreign Affairs; John F Colburn – Minister of Interior; William H Crowell – Minister of Finance; Arthur P Peterson – Attorney General) who repaired at once to the palace. The Queen was at a table, still dressed in the magnificent costume of the morning, and sparkling in a coronet of diamonds.”
• “She at once presented them with the draft of the new constitution, demanded their signatures, and declared her intention to promulgate the same at once.”
• “Attorney-general Peterson and Minister of Interior Colburn decidedly refused to do so, and Ministers Cornwell and Parker, though more hesitatingly, joined their colleagues in this refusal.”

The Provisional Government (and subsequent Republic, Territory & State) did not steal the land from the Hawaiian people – Crown Lands Remain in the Public Trust
• Crown and Government Lands, though under the control of changing sovereigns and governments (Kingdom to Provisional Government to Republic to Territory to State,) were in and continue to remain in the ‘public domain’ for the public good.
• US Court of Claims concluded, “The constitution of the Republic of Hawai‘i, as respects the crown lands, provided as follows: ‘That portion of the public domain heretofore known as crown land is hereby declared to have been heretofore, and now to be, the property of the Hawaiian Government …” (Lili‘uokalani v The United States, 1910)
• We now generally refer to the Crown and Government Lands as ‘ceded’ lands. Under the Admission Act, about 1.2-million acres are to “be held by (the) State as a public trust” to promote one or more of five purposes:
o support of the public schools and other public educational institutions
o betterment of the conditions of native Hawaiians (per the Hawaiian Homes Act, 1920)
o development of farm and home ownership on as widespread a basis as possible
o making of public improvements
o provision of lands for public use

The United States does not have to acquire property only through a Treaty of Annexation with a concurring vote by the US Senate.
• Annexation of Hawai‘i to the US was not a hostile takeover, it was something the Republic of Hawai‘i sought. “There was no ‘conquest’ by force in the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands nor ‘holding as conquered territory;’ they (Republic of Hawai‘i) came to the United States in the same way that Florida did, to wit, by voluntary cession”. (Territorial Supreme Court; Albany Law Journal)
• “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.” (Legal Issues Raised by Proposed Presidential Proclamation To Extend the Territorial Sea, October 4, 1988)

To read more on the overthrow Click HERE:

Here is the URL: https://imagesofoldhawaii.com/wp-content/uploads/Overthrow.pdf

One more correction to the many misconceptions … on January 17, 1893, the Hawai‘i constitutional monarchy was overthrown, not the Hawaiian race.

Commenters, please focus on the facts and if referring to the linked document. Please note the page and line number you are referring to (please include your source reference, as well).

© 2023 Hoʻokuleana LLC

Raising_of_American_flag_at_Iolani_Palace-1898
Raising_of_American_flag_at_Iolani_Palace-1898

by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Martin Luther King at the Hawai‘i Legislature

On Thursday, September 17, 1959, in the Hawaii House of Representatives, 1959 First Special Session, Dr. Martin Luther King addressed the members of the House as Follows:

“Mr. Speaker, distinguished members of the House of Representatives of this great new state in our Union, ladies and gentlemen:

It is certainly a delightful privilege and pleasure for me to have this great opportunity and, I shall say, it is a great honor to come before you today and to have the privilege of saying just a few words to you about some of the pressing problems confronting our nation and our world.

I come to you with a great deal of appreciation and great feeling of appreciation, I should say, for what has been accomplished in this beautiful setting and in this beautiful state of our Union.

As I think of the struggle that we are engaged in in the South land, we look to you for inspiration and as a noble example, where you have already accomplished in the area of racial harmony and racial justice, what we are struggling to accomplish in other sections of the country …

… and you can never know what it means to those of us caught for the moment in the tragic and often dark midnight of man’s inhumanity to man, to come to a place where we see the glowing daybreak of freedom and dignity and racial justice.

People ask me from time to time as I travel across the country and over the world whether there has been any real progress in the area of race relations, and I always answer it by saying that there are three basic attitudes that one can take toward the question of progress in the area of race relations.

One can take the attitude of extreme optimism. The extreme optimist would contend that we have come a long, long way in the area of race relations, and he would point proudly to the strides that have been made in the area of civil rights in the last few decades.

And, from this, he would conclude that the problem is just about solved now and that we can sit down comfortably by the wayside and wait on the coming of the inevitable.

And then there is the extreme, the attitude of extreme pessimism, that we often find. The extreme pessimist would contend that we have made only minor strides in the area of human relations.

He would contend that we have created many more problems than we have solved. He would look around and see the tensions in certain sections of the country; he would listen to the rhythmic beat of the deep rumblings of discontent; he would point to the presence of Federal troops in Little Rock, Arkansas …

… he would point to schools being closed in some states of the Union and from all of this, he would conclude that we have retrogressed instead of progressed.  And then he would go on later and contend that a monster human nature cannot be changed.

Sometimes he will turn to the realm of theology and talk about the tragic taint of original sin hovering over every individual, or he might turn to psychology and talk about the inflexibility of certain habit structures once they have been molded and from all of this …

… he would conclude that there can be no progress in the area of human relations because human beings cannot be changed once they have started on a certain road.

Now, it is interesting to notice that the extreme optimist and the extreme pessimist have at least one thing in common. They both agree that we must sit down and do nothing in the area of race relations. The extreme optimist says do nothing because integration is inevitable.

The extreme pessimist says do nothing because integration is impossible.

But I think there is a third position, a third attitude that can be taken, namely the realistic position. The realistic attitude seeks to reconcile the truths of two opposites while avoiding the extremes of both.

So the realist in the area of race relations would agree with the optimist that we have come a long, long way, but he would balance that by agreeing with the pessimist that we have a long, long way to go.

And so this is my answer to the questions of whether there has been any progress in the area of race relations. I seek to be realistic and say we have a long, long way to go.

Now, it is easy for us to see that we have come a long, long way.

Twenty-five years ago, fifty years ago, a year hardly passed that numerous Negroes were not brutally lynched in our nation by vicious mobs. Lynchings have about ceased today.

We think about the fact that just twenty-five years ago, most of the Southern states had a system known as a poll tax to prevent Negroes from becoming registered voters. The poll tax has been eliminated in all but four states.

We think about the fact that the Negro is voting now more than he has ever voted before. At the turn of the century, there were very few Negro registered voters in the South. By 1948 that number had reached to 750,000, and, today, it stands at about 1,300,000.

And even in the area of economic justice, we have seen a good deal of progress. The average Negro wage earner in the South today and over the nation makes four times more than the average Negro wage earner of ten years ago and the national income of the Negro is now $17 billion a year.

That is more than all of the exports of the United States and more than the national income of Canada. So, we’ve come a long, long way.

Then we’ve come a long, long way in seeing the walls of segregation gradually crumble.

When the Supreme Court rendered its decision in 1954, seventeen states and the District of Columbia practiced segregation in the public schools …

…but, today, most of these states have complied with the decision and just five states are left that have not made any move in the area of compliance and two of these states are now under orders to integrate – Atlanta, Georgia and New Orleans, Louisiana.

So after next September, that will only leave Mississippi, Alabama and South Carolina as the states that have not complied with the Supreme Court’s decision.

So, you can see that we have come a long, long way. But before stopping –it would be wonderful if I could stop here – but I must move on for two or three more minutes and say that there is another sign.

You see, it would be a fact for me to say we have come a long, long way, but it wouldn’t be telling the truth. A fact is the absence of contradiction, but truth is the presence of coherence.

Truth is the relatedness of facts.

Now, it is a fact that we have come a long, long way, but in order to tell the truth, it is necessary to move on and say we have a long, long way to go. If we stop here, we would be the victims of a dangerous optimism. We would be victims of an illusion wrapped in superficiality. So, in order to tell the truth, it’s necessary to move on and say we have a long, long way to go.

Now, it is not difficult to see that. We know that the forces of resistance are rising at times to ominous proportions in the South. The legislative halls of many of our states ring loud with such words as ‘interposition’ and ‘nullification.’

While lynchings have ceased to a great extent, other things are happening. Churches are being bombed, homes are being bombed, schools are being bombed, synagogues are being bombed by forces that are determined to stand against the law of the land.

And although the Negro is voting more than ever before, we know that there are still conniving forces being used to keep the Negro from being a registered voter. Out of the potential 5,000,000 Negro registered voters in the South, we only have 1,300,000.

This means that we have a long, long way to go in order to make justice a reality there in the registration of voting. And although we have come a long, long way in the economic realm, we have a long, long way to there in order to make economic justice a reality.

And then segregation is still with us.

Although we have seen the walls gradually crumble, it is still with us. I imply that figuratively speaking, that Old Man Segregation is on his death bed, but you know history has proven that social systems have a great last-minute breathing power, and the guardians of the status quo are always on hand with their oxygen tents to keep the old order alive, and this is exactly what we see today.

So segregation is still with us.

We are confronted in the South in its glaring and conspicuous forms, and we are confronted in almost every other section of the nation in its hidden and subtle forms.

But if democracy is to live, segregation must die.

Segregation is a cancer in the body politic which must be removed before our democratic health can be realized. In a real sense, the shape of the world today does not permit us the luxury of an anemic democracy. If we are to survive, if we are to stand as a force in the world, if we are to maintain our prestige, we must solve this problem because people are looking over to America.

Just two years ago I traveled all over Africa and talked with leaders from that great continent. One of the things they said to me was this: No amount of extensive handouts and beautiful words would be substitutes for treating our brothers in the United States as first-class citizens and human beings. This came to me from mouth of Prime Minister Nkrumah of Ghana.

Just four months ago, I traveled throughout India and the Middle East and talked with many of the people and leaders of that great country and other people in the Middle East, and these are the things they talked about: That we must solve this problem if we are to stand and to maintain our prestige.

And I can remember very vividly meeting people all over Europe and in the Middle East and in the Far East, and even though many of them could not speak English, they knew how to say ‘Little Rock.’

And these are the things that we must be concerned about – we must be concerned about because we love America and we are out to free not only the Negro.

This is not our struggle today to free 17,000,000 Negroes. It’s bigger than that.

We are seeking to free the soul of America.

Segregation debilitates the white man as well as the Negro. We are to free all men, all races and all groups. This is our responsibility and this is our challenge, and we look to this great new state in our Union as the example and as the inspiration.

As we move on in this realm, let us move on with the faith that this problem can be solved, and that it will be solved, believing firmly that all reality hinges on moral foundations, and we are struggling for what is right, and we are destined to win.

We have come a long, long way. We have a long, long way to go. I close, if you will permit me, by quoting the words of an old Negro slave preacher.

He didn’t quite have his grammar right, but he uttered some words in the form of a prayer with great symbolic profundity and these are the works he said: ‘Lord, we ain’t what we want to be; we ain’t what we ought to be; we ain’t what we gonna be, but thank God, we ain’t what we was.’ Thank you.”

At the conclusion of his address, there was much applause.

© 2023 Ho‘okuleana LLC

by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

‘She was a friend of John Brown.’

The words on the tombstone of Mary Ellen Pleasant only tell a part of her story.

Like Brown, she “was an ardent Abolitionist, and she determined to assist Brown. She met him at Chatham, Canada West, over the line, and gave him a purse of gold she had taken from California. Brown used the money in the cause.” (Tripp)

Some called her ‘Mammy’, but she asserted, “I am Mammy to no one.”

According to Pleasant, she was born free on August 19, 1814 in Philadelphia. She claimed her father was Louis Alexander Williams, a native Hawaiian (‘a Kanaka from the Pacific Islands’) and her mother, Mary (her namesake) was a “full blooded Negress from Louisiana.” (Ball etal)

Her father was a businessman who imported silk from India. While she believed he had some education, she knew her mother had none and was likely illiterate.

When she was 6-years old her parents sent her to Nantucket, MA, to work for a white family as a domestic servant. Pleasant also worked for a Quaker woman, ‘Grandma Hussey.’

Pleasant believed her father had given Hussey a considerable amount of money for her to get an education, but she never received one. Pleasant learned to read and write, and described herself as “a girl full of smartness.” (Ball et al)

Nantucket proved an ideal locale for an ambitions, headstrong girl to learn business, Indeed, Nantucket Town was overrun with woman-owned shops because of the abundance of so-called whaling wives who ran the town while the men were at sea. (Hudson)

When she ended her work on the island of Nantucket, the family who owned the store helped Pleasant become established in Boston. It was there that she met and married her first husband, Cuban planter and abolitionist Alexander Smith. He died in 1848 and left her with $45,000, a substantial legacy, to be used to support abolitionist causes.

Soon after, she married John Pleasant (or Pleasants), who had been an overseer on the Smith plantation. She reportedly was involved in the Underground Railroad, and was so successful in assisting escaping slaves that she had “a price on her head in the South.” (Encyclopedia)

Accounts relate that the Pleasants went to California in 1849, during the gold rush, but her husband apparently did not figure very significantly in her life after the journey.

Pleasant moved to San Francisco and put her business acumen and entrepreneurial skills, not to mention her reputation as a noteworthy cook, to work. There was much wealth circulating in the heady days of the gold rush, but few luxuries in the area to spend it on.

Miners and merchants were clamoring for services, and Pleasant, according to San Francisco newspapers, rejected many offers of employment as a cook from people with means. Instead, with her name now well known, she opened a boarding house that provided lodging and food, both of which were scarce.

She expanded her business dealings by lending money to businessmen and miners at an interest rate of 10%, while also investing wisely on the advice of her influential boarders and other associates. During this time, she gained a reputation as “The Fabulous Negro Madam,” acting as a procurer for her male associates. (Encyclopedia)

She invested her money wisely: Her businesses in San Francisco included laundries, dairies and exclusive restaurants — all of which were quite lucrative in a city filled with miners and single businessmen.

In the 1890 census she listed her occupation as ‘capitalist.’ (Curbed SFO) Beltane Ranch in Glen Ellen, once owned by Mary Ellen Pleasant, has been recognized as a Black historical site by the National Park Service. (Sonoma-Index-Tribune)

Between the years of 1830 and 1927, as the last generation of blacks born into slavery was reaching maturity, a small group of industrious, tenacious, and daring men and women broke new ground to attain the highest levels of financial success. (Wills)

Concerned about racial equality, she became increasingly involved in helping others and in civil-rights activities during the 1850s and 1860s. Mary Ellen Pleasant, used her Gold Rush wealth to provide financial assistance for these causes; she also sought out and rescued slaves being held illegally in the California countryside.

(California had entered the Union as a free state under the Compromise of 1850, but the legal status of slaves brought there by their owners from slave states was vague.)

Pleasant also found jobs in wealthy households for runaway slaves and developed an information network. One of the most widely circulated, albeit unsubstantiated, reports on Pleasant concerns her role in abolitionist John Brown’s raid on the U.S. arsenal at Harper’s Ferry, West Virginia, in 1859.

She reportedly sailed to the East in 1858 and in Canada gave Brown $30,000 to finance his battle against slavery. Among Brown’s belongings when he was captured was a note that read: “The ax is laid at the foot of the tree. When the first blow is struck there will be more money to help. (signed) W.E.P.”

Supporters of this theory suggest that the “M” in Pleasant’s initials may have been misread as a “W.” Skeptics of her account of the Brown connection, however, say that Brown had already left Canada by the time of her visit there, and that she produced no evidence to prove she had given him any money.

Pleasant returned to San Francisco around 1859 and continued both her business activities and her activism. In 1863, she was integral in winning African-Americans the right to testify in court in California (previously, neither African-Americans nor Native Americans were allowed to speak in court in civil or criminal cases, even ones in which they were directly involved).

She also fought to win the right of African-Americans to use San Francisco’s streetcars. In 1868, she brought two railroads to court and successfully sued them for refusing her passage.

By mid-1899, however, claiming to be drained financially by her legal entanglements, Pleasant filed for bankruptcy, and requested food and other necessities from acquaintances. (It is thought, nonetheless, that she retained a considerable amount of money even at that time.)

She lived her last few months in the San Francisco home of a family named Sherwood who had befriended her, dying on January 11, 1904, and was buried in their burial plot in Napa, California. (Encyclopedia)

While the corner of Bush and Octavia Streets in San Francisco is home to the city’s smallest park (it’s just a small stretch of sidewalk without a patch of grass or spot for picnicking), it is dedicated to a larger-than-life figure: Mary Ellen Pleasant (1817-1904).

A round floor plaque in the park reads, “Mother of Civil Rights in California. She supported the western terminus of the underground railway for fugitive slaves 1850-1865. This legendary pioneer once lived on this site and planted these six trees.” (SF Heritage) (An image of Queen Emma is sometimes mistaken/ mislabeled as Mary Ellen Pleasant.)

© 2023 Ho‘okuleana LLC

© 2023 Ho‘okuleana LLC

by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Henry Poor

Henry French Poor was the eldest son of Henry Francis Poor and Caroline Paakaiulaula Bush; he was born here June 8, [1857].

“Poor received his early education under Mr. Gulick, Sr., father of the late Charles T. Gulick of Honolulu. He afterwards attended Punahou College, at that time under the direction of Professor Church.”

“He left school, however, at the age of 13 and entered the banking house of Bishop & Co. as a clerk, where he remained about eight years.”

“At that time, owing to ill health, Mr. Poor first visited the United States, where he spent some three months. When he returned to Honolulu he entered the mercantile house of Castle & Cooke.”

“At this time he was selected by the Government to act as secretary to Hon. C P. Iaukea, the head of the Hawaiian Embassy to the coronation of Alexander III of Russia.”

“Continuing from there he made a tour of the world, visiting the greater part of Europe, India, Japan, Egypt, the United States and England and meeting many great personages there. His visit to India was immediately connected with the question of securing a labor supply for the plantations of Hawaii.” (PCA, Nov 29, 1899)

“Henry F Poor was one of the most brilliant Hawaiians whose cradle ever rocked in these beautiful Islands.  … He possessed the generous spirit of his race and the keen intelligence of his New England’s forebears.”

“As secretary to Colonel Iaukea on the Kalakaua embassy to the rulers of the world he covered himself with honors and his bright letters were published in the local papers.” (The Independent, Nov 29, 1899)

“While abroad Mr. Poor received several foreign decorations, among which were the Order of the Rising Sun of Japan, the Order of Simon Bolivar of South America, an Austrian and a Russian order and several others. He also held the Hawaiian Order of Crown of Hawaii and Order of Kapiolani.” (PCA, Nov 29, 1899)

“Later on he went to Samoa with Governor Bush and to his tact and gentlemanly action was due the fact that the Kaimiloa incident did not end in an international scandal.” (The Independent, Nov 29, 1899)

“In 1887 [Kaimiloa] was purchased by King Kalakaua, and after being fitted up as a man-of-war, was sent on a mission to Samoa. This mission was a failure …”

“King Kalakaua had just returned from a trip around the world. Sundry people, at all the places he stopped filled him with hot air, and he wanted to be emperor of the Pacific. On his return to Honolulu he promptly set about the work of trying to get control of all the islands which had not yet been seized by European rulers.”

“[Kalakaua’s] Prime Minister, Gibson, induced him to fit out the Kaimiloa as a war ship and send it on a diplomatic mission to Samoa, where Ambassador ‘Ned’ Bush was instructed to either annex the place or induce the King of Samoa to make a treaty acknowledging that Kalakaua was the supreme ruler of a Pacific Island confederacy.”

“On board the warship was ‘Admiral’ Jackson, Ambassador Bush, Henry Poor, secretary of the legation, a big crew, an enormous quantity of gin, a band, and plenty of the King’s dreamy ideas of a Pacific confederacy.”

“To this day the mystery of how the vessel ever reached Samoa has not been solved, and it is a wonder that she ever got there at all, for gin and other drink never flowed freer on a private craft than it did on the Kaimiloa. …”

“Then wild with the dissipation or the voyage, the crew mutinied, and capturing Secretary Poor, chained him to the deck.”    (PCA Aug 8, 1902)


“The officers and crew of the Kaimiloa began to go ashore almost nightly to carouse in the streets of Apia. One night gunner William Cox, on returning to the ship, got into a fight with other officers.”

“He rushed the powder magazine, threatening to blow up the ship. Lt. Frank J. Waiau and ship’s carpenter John Galway stopped him, but the brawling went on. Lt. Sam I. Maikai, nominally in command, went ashore with Waiau to report to the Hawaiian legation.”

“They wanted to resign but Bush would not hear of it. He ordered them back on board and sent along his secretary, H. F. Poor. Jackson also went along with them. He and Poor, revolvers in hand, found the mutineers trying to take over the armory.

“They drove the mutineers out on deck. Waiau over-powered Cox and put him in irons on the bridge.” (Adler)

“The German warship Olga was in the harbor at the time, and her captain, noticing the row on the Hawaiian vessel, sent a longboat over … and threatened to tow the whole outfit bark to Hawaii unless the trouble subsided. …”

“On arrival [back in Honolulu] here [Kaimiloa] was dismantled, and never again used for war purposes. No one knows how many sins were committed aboard the vessel while trading in the South Seas, but many people have heard something of the story of her remarkable cruise as a man-of-war to Samoa.”   (PCA Aug 8, 1902)

Poor hosted Robert Louis Stevenson on his visit to the Islands.  On January 24, 1889, Stevenson arrived in Honolulu and spent the first six months of that year in the Hawaiian Islands (he later settled and lived in Samoa.)

“For the first few days the Stevenson party stayed with Henry Poor and his mother Mrs Caroline Bush, at 40 Queen Emma Street, Honolulu (24-27 January).”

“Then on 27 January 1889 they moved to Poor’s bungalow, Manuia Lanai, at Waikiki, three miles east of Honolulu.  In early February Stevenson decided to send the Casco back to San Francisco and stay on to work in Hawaii.”

“As a result he rented the house next to Henry Poor’s. This too was a one-storey ‘rambling house or set of houses’ in a garden, centred on a lanai, ‘an open room or summer parlour, partly surrounded with venetian shutters, in part quite open, which is the living room’”.  (RLS Website)

Henry French Poor died in Honolulu on November 28, 1899 and is buried at O‘ahu Cemetery.

© 2023 Ho‘okuleana LLC

by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Kaua Kūloko (Civil War 1895)

Following the overthrow of Queen Liliʻuokalani in 1893, the Committee of Safety established the Provisional Government of Hawaiʻi as a temporary government until an assumed annexation by the United States.

The Provisional Government convened a constitutional convention and established the Republic of Hawaiʻi on July 4, 1894. The Republic continued to govern the Islands.

From January 6 to January 9, 1895, patriots of the Kingdom of Hawaiʻi and the forces that had overthrown the constitutional Hawaiian monarchy were engaged in a war that consisted of three battles on the island of Oʻahu, Hawaiʻi.

This has frequently been referred to as the “Counter-revolution”.  It has also been called the Second Wilcox Rebellion of 1895, the Revolution of 1895, the Hawaiian Counter-revolution of 1895, the 1895 Uprising in Hawaiʻi, the Hawaiian Civil War, the 1895 Uprising Against the Provisional Government or the Uprising of 1895.

In their attempt to return Queen Liliʻuokalani to the throne, it was the last major military operation by royalists who opposed the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaiʻi.  The goal of the rebellion failed.

The chief conspirators who conducted the planning were four: CT Gulick, a former Cabinet Minister of Kalākaua, an American; Samuel Nowlein, a hapa haole, former Captain of the Queen’s Guard; WH Rickard, an Englishman long resident in Hawaiʻi; and Major Seward, an American long domiciled with John A Cummins, a wealthy hapa haole.

For three months, these four held frequent meetings at Gulick’s house and settled upon a plan for the capture of the city and public buildings.

Capt. Nowlein was to be commander of the rebel forces. Major Seward was to procure arms, Rickard was generally useful and Gulick was the statesman of the party.

Gulick, with the others, drew up a new Constitution, wrote a Proclamation restoring the Queen’s Government and prepared written Commissions for a number of chief officials.

On December 20th, after several days watching by five of Seward and Cummins’ men on Mānana (Rabbit Island, near Waimānalo,) the schooner signaled and was answered. The men gave the pass word “Missionary.”

They received two cases containing eighty pistols and ammunition which they first buried on the islet, but afterwards carried to Honolulu. The schooner then lay off outside for twelve days.

On the 28th, the little steamer Waimānalo was chartered by Seward and Rickard, and on New Year’s Day intercepted the schooner about thirty miles NE of Oʻahu, and received from her 288-Winchester carbines and 50,000-cartridges.

Captain Nowlein had secretly enlisted Hawaiians in squads of thirty-eight. About 210 of them assembled at Waimānalo during Saturday night and Sunday, the 6th. They captured and detained all persons passing or residing beyond Diamond Head.

Robert Wilcox, of former insurgent fame, had joined the rebels, and was placed in command under Nowlein.

Beginning on the night of January 6, 1895, several skirmishes ensued, with slight victory for the Royalists.  However, their benefit of surprise was now lost and they were out-numbered and out-gunned.

On January 7, 1895 martial law was declared in Hawaiʻi by Sanford B Dole.

Three major battle grounds were involved.  First, Wilcox and about 40 of his men were on the rim and summit of Diamond Head firing down on the soldiers.

Seeing no tactical importance in remaining on Diamond Head, Wilcox ordered his men to retreat to Waiʻalae. The new strategy was to move north into Koʻolau mountains then west, avoiding the Government forces in the south.

On January 7, the Royalists moved into Mōʻiliʻili where they were involved with additional skirmishes.  Then, on January 8, Wilcox and his men were discovered crossing into Mānoa Valley (they were hoping to get above the city, as well as rouse more supporters.)

Wilcox and his men then escaped up a trail on the precipice to the ridge separating Mānoa from Nuʻuanu. On that ridge his men dispersed into the mountain above; Wilcox and a few others crossed Nuʻuanu that night, eluding the guards.

Some 400 of the Government forces guarded the valleys from Nuʻuanu to Pālolo for more than a week, and scoured the mountain ridges clear to the eastern Makapuʻu point.

This resulted in the capture of all the leading rebels.

As evidence against conspirators accumulated, some forty whites and 120 Hawaiians were arrested. Four foreigners and 140 Hawaiians were taken prisoners of war. The prisons were supplemented by the use of the old Barracks.

Liliʻuokalani was put under arrest on the 16th, and confined in a chamber of ʻIolani Palace.

A tribunal was formed and evidence began to be taken on the 18th.  Nowlein, Wilcox, Bertelmann and TB Walker all pleaded guilty, and subsequently gave evidence for the prosecution.

On January 24, 1895, in an effort to prevent further bloodshed, Liliʻuokalani executed a document addressed to President Sanford B Dole, in which she renounced all her former rights and privileges as Queen and swore allegiance to the Republic.  The president pardoned the royalists after serving part of their prison sentence.

Convicted of having knowledge of a royalist plot, Liliʻuokalani was fined $5,000 and sentenced to five-years in prison at hard labor. The sentence was commuted to imprisonment in an upstairs bedroom of ʻIolani Palace.

After her release from ʻIolani Palace, the Queen remained under house arrest for five-months at her private home, Washington Place. For another eight-months, she was forbidden to leave Oʻahu, before all restrictions were lifted.

Lots of the information here comes from an article in The Friend, February, 1895.

© 2023 Hoʻokuleana LLC