UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI‘I AT HILO ◆ HOHONU 2020 ◆ VOL. 18 Hawaiian Kingdom: Reinstated use of Western technology, he may have created a greater debt that would impact the future of the Domini Molina Hawaiian Kingdom. History 154 The Hawaiian Monarchy became so enamored This research paper discusses the causes and with Western technologies; they began to displace consequences of land dispossession that occurred their own people through foreign affairs. During in the Hawaiian Kingdom from the time of King the reign of King Kamehameha III, new laws were Kamehameha I in 1810 to 2019. With the power formed which changed the ways of the Kanaka of perspectivism, it is important to look at the past drastically. In the year 1848, the Great Mahele oc- of the Hawaiian Kingdom to understand its future, curred, dividing lands throughout the Hawaiian as much has been documented about the Hawaiian Kingdom. The Great Mahele and Kuleana Act Kingdom from both foreign and Hawaiian per- made Native Hawaiian commoners, who were spectives. Initially, this paper will examine how the land became dispossessed from the Native lands which they tended, and prove their rights to Hawaiians (Kanaka; Kanaka Maoli), second, the land. This displaced many of the Kanaka from the denationalization of Native Hawaiians in the their homelands, as they did not have the monies Hawaiian Kingdom, third, the illegal annexation necessary to exchange for the properties, which had been their main source of livelihood. There processes available today to reinstate the Hawaiian were additional laws limiting the rights of owner- Kingdom to the Native Hawaiians. ship to foreigners, though they were able to obtain King Kamehameha I had a great interest in the long term leases of the lands on which the Kanaka technology of foreigners that made their way to the could no longer afford to reside. shores of the Hawaiian Islands, in this instance, the With foreign access to Kuleana lands and - other Government lands divided by the Great Mahele, came the rise and fall of sugar planta- tions which dominated the economic imbalance writes of this history in further detail in his book, in the Hawaiian Islands. Five men with advanced we will fo- knowledge in business and corporate understand- cus here on the use of military power with Western ing made their way into the Privy Council of the technologies, as he states, “in return for military Hawaiian Monarchy, their companies known as assistance, Kamehameha agreed to cede the Big Island to Great Britain, and the Union Jack was C. Brewer and Company, Theo Davies Company, hoisted to the intonations of Hawaiian chants.”1 Castle and Cooke, and Alexander and Baldwin.”4 Captain George Vancouver played a large role in As Kent quotes from a Native Hawaiian historian, - “Samuel Kamakau later expressed this different world view rather poetically, when he said, ‘You between British possessions along the west coast foreigners regard the winds, the rain, the land, and of Canada and the new colony of Australia.”2 This, sea as things to make money with; but we look upon them as loving friends with whom we share in London was more concerned with affairs closer the universe.”5 The investments in property these to home. “Kamehameha used his contacts with Westerners to secure arms and technology that control the security of their companies’ success by gave him a decisive superiority over his opponents securing the lands they leased and eventually buy- and eventually enabled him to unite almost all of ing out the majority Government lands throughout 3 This may have looked to the Hawaiian Islands. An American missionary, Kamehameha like a great victory, though with the - 1 Noel J. Kent, (Honolulu: ence becoming Minister of Education, and “played University of Hawaii Press, 1993) 15. 2 Kent, . 15. 4 Ibid., 14. 3 Ibid., 16. 5 Ibid., 37-38. 19 UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI‘I AT HILO ◆ HOHONU 2020 ◆ VOL. 18 an important role in consigning the Hawaiian the Hawaiian Islands.10 With the support of United language to obscurity and Americanizing the States Minister, John L. Stevens, the Provisional school system.”6 By denationalizing the Native Government obtained access to the Hawaiian Hawaiians, and displacing them from their home- Kingdom Government, through false allegations, requesting United States military assistance for while Native Hawaiians were relegated to second their safety and the wrongful imprisonment of class conditions. 11 In a portion of the state- The denationalization of Native Hawaiians had begun to take place with the arrival of American 17, 1893, regarding the Provisional Government, missionaries in 1820. In the years to come, Native she states: Hawaiians were prohibited from speaking their na- tive tongue in the schools developed by American Now to avoid any collision of armed forces, and missionaries and were discouraged from danc- perhaps the loss of life, I do this under protest ing hula, as it was considered a pagan ritual. and impelled by said force yield my author- Charles Reed Bishop, another foreigner heavily ity until such time as the Government of the involved in the Council of the Hawaiian Kingdom United States shall, upon facts being presented Monarchy, as Minister of Foreign Affairs, married to it, undo the action of its representatives and Princess Bernice Pauahi Paki, who was the last reinstate me in the authority which I claim as descendant of King Kamehameha I and the larg- the Constitutional Sovereign of the Hawaiian est landowner in the Hawaiian Islands. In Princess Islands.12 Pauahi’s last living will and testament written in 1883, she entrusted the entirety of her remaining estate to a board of trustees, to erect and maintain the power of the Government of the Hawaiian Kamehameha Schools throughout the Hawaiian Kingdom to the Provisional Government, and by Islands.7 simply yielding her authority to the Government Charles Reed Bishop, Charles Montague Cooke, of the United States, until facts being presented, Samuel Mills Damon, Charles McEwen Hyde and would reinstate proper authority to the Government William Owen Smith, some of whom were busi- of the Hawaiian Kingdom. ness owners of the ‘Big Five’ companies, mem- On December 18, 1893, President Grover bers of the Privy Council, and involved in the il- Cleveland wrote in a letter to the United States legal overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom.8 not absolutely and permanently, but temporar- the Bayonet Constitution was constructed and so- ily and conditionally until such time as the facts could be considered by the United States”.13 On Native Hawaiian’s rights, by prequalifying them- November 23, 1993, President William J. Clinton signed the ‘Apology Resolution’ to offer an apol- acquired by owning land throughout the Hawaiian ogy to the Native Hawaiians, acknowledging the Islands.9 Although this was done by force, there “illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii on was no resolution made, and the illegal annexation behalf of the United States”.14 On November 8, of the Hawaiian Kingdom took place in 1893, dur- 1999, the Permanent Court of Arbitration was pre- sented with this case: Government was formed, that was not an autho- rized Government of the United States, but a group Aresident of Hawaii, brought a claim against the of businessmen who had investments throughout 10 Hawaiian Kingdom Blog. “Who Were the Insurgents Calling themselves the Committee of Safety?” Posted on June 16, 2014. 6 Ibid., 27. 11 President Grover Cleveland in his letter to Congress; Washington, December 18, 1893. 12 United States Public Law 103-15005. 9 Neil M. Levy, Journal Article: “Native Hawaiian Land Rights,” 13 President Grover Cleveland in his letter to Congress; Washington, California Law Review, Inc. (California: California Law Review. 1975) December 18, 1893. 862. 14 United States Public Law 103-150. 20 UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI‘I AT HILO ◆ HOHONU 2020 ◆ VOL. 18 Hawaiian Kingdom by its Council of Regency State, with the intent of bloodshed, served as an (“Hawaiian Kingdom”) on the grounds that “act of war.”18 the Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom is in continual violation of: (a) its 1849 Treaty of Western technologies used to unite the Hawaiian Friendship, Commerce and Navigation with Kingdom during the reign of King Kamehameha the United States of America, as well as the principles of international law laid down in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and the use of the United States military by the 1969 and (b) the principles of international co- Provisional Government to illegally overthrow the mity, for allowing the unlawful imposition of Hawaiian Monarchy, the Hawaiian Kingdom has American municipal laws over the claimant’s person within the territorial jurisdiction of the Native Hawaiians from their homelands, which Hawaiian Kingdom.15 continues today. With the Provisional Government in control of the Hawaiian Kingdom Government, With this case being presented to the Permanent and the education of its subjects, the denational- Court of Arbitration, where international law pre- ization of the Kanaka Maoli was a disguise used cedes jurisdiction of claims made between ei- to cover up the illegal annexation. With the pro- ther an Independent State vs. Independent State, longed occupation of the Provisional Government or Personal Party vs. Independent State, con- in the Hawaiian Kingdom present today, currently cludes that the Hawaiian Kingdom is still today an Independent State, being illegally occupied by according to international law.19 If the occupiers a Provisional Government of the United States, of a state do not abide by the laws of occupation, does the occupied state need to abide by the laws The Permanent Court of Arbitration has a set of occupation? Prior to the illegal overthrow, be- of rules which they must abide by in order to reach - a verdict.