The coming Hawaii

Front matter

HAWAII

JOSErai- KING'dOQIMI^H

W^t CLfllorlD Co'da? Series

Preface

IT will be noted, when reading the succeeding pages, that the author has followed the example of one group of the other writers about Hawaii. These writers may be divided into two principal classes: those who have little to say which is not praise, and those who condemn entirely. If the present writer has placed himself in the first division, it has been done dehberately and with what is considered ample reason. The Hawaiian archipelago is attractive in almost every way, and its charms are of the kind which grow in number and degree for him whose first impressions were favourable; while even for him who had to admit some disappointment at first, a lengthened sojourn almost invariably transforms this into enthusiasm.

There is little to say in the way of introduction to the chapters which follow. The author has been adversely criticised for not venturing into the dangerous field of prophecy when discussing the future of some other countries which have been taken as the subjects of other volumes in this series: China and Mexico, for example. He still beHeves that he was wise in refraining from all attempts to guess at the political future of those countries, for recent events have more than tended to show how hazardous prophecy would have been. It would be

VI PREFACE

a simpler task in the case of the Territory of Hawaii, for its future is now linked with that of the great United States proper; nevertheless, it might not be such an easy matter as it seems to tell what is to be the future of our own country and its overseas dependencies.

One pleasing duty is cheerfully discharged in this brief Preface, and that is to express thanks to Mr. H. P. Wood, Director of the Hawaii Promotion Committee, for assistance rendered in procuring the photographs which have been reproduced as illustrations, and for furnishing much of the valuable data. Like thanks are due to Mr. T. G. Thrum, the Honolulu Chamber of Commerce, and others who have supplied material.

J. K. G.

Contents

CHAPTER PAGE

I. Early History i

II. Later History 14

Chapter I Early History

THERE can surely be no objection to taking a somewhat careful, but very much condensed, look at the early history of the group of islands which now constitute one of the most interesting of our overseas possessions. It is really necessary to do this, if we are to be in a position to think even of what may be the future of the archipelago. There is no intention of venturing within the dangerous realm of prophecy in this book, if by that expression is to be understood there may be an attempt to forecast the political future of Hawaii. About that subject it is not purposed to have anything to say; the unwisdom of such a course must be manifest to all, and it would certainly be offensive to some readers, no matter whether it were followed in the spirit of the brightest optimism, or from the standpoint of the sourest pessimist.

Yet just what the Territory of Hawaii is to-day, economically and socially, is not at all clearly known to many Americans; while the early history of the people is not so familiar to a goodly number as to make a brief resume tedious. We must, of course, accept in the beginning of the narrative the name by which the group was christened in 1778 by Captain James

Cook, who wrote: *'I named the whole group the Sandwich Islands in honour of the Earl of Sandwich." The name was given as a compliment to John Montagu, fourth Earl of Sandwich, an English statesman, traveller, and author, 1718 to 1792; at the time of Cook's most celebrated voyage. First Lord of the Admiralty, the British equivalent for our Secretary of the Navy. The reason for this compliment is doubtless to be found in the following extract from Cook's narrative:* "While we lay in Long Reach, thus employed, the Earl of Sandwich, Sir Hugh Palliser, and others of the Board of Admiralty, as the last mark of the very great attention they had all along shewn to this equipment, paid us a visit on the 8th of June, to examine whether everything had been completed conformably to their intentions and orders, and to the satisfaction of all who were to embark in the voyage. They, and several other Noblemen and Gentlemen, their friends, honoured me with their company at dinner on that day; and on their coming on board, and also on their going ashore, we saluted them with seventeen guns, and three cheers."

The proper native appellation for the cluster of

*"A voyage to the Pacific Ocean undertaken by the command of His Majesty [George HI of England] for making discoveries in the Northern Hemisphere. To determine the position and extent of the west side of North America; its distance from Asia: and the practicabiUty of a northern passage to Europe. Performed under the direction of Captains Cook, Clerke, and Gore, in His Majesty's ships the Resolution and Discovery. In the years 1776, 1777, 1778, 1779, and 1780. In three volumes. Volumes I and II written by Captain James Cook, F.R.S., Volume III by Captain James King, LL.D. and F.R.S." It should be noted that this narrative is designated as Cook's Third Voyage.

islands, and the only legitimate one, was Hawaii nei pae aina; this was, however, susceptible of a slight change in order, to Ka pae aina 0 Hawaii, which may be rendered in English as ''These Hawaiian Islands." Changing these into the, we have the proper term that has practically superseded the one bestowed by Cook. The original Hawaiian phrase was derived from the largest island of the group, Hawaii. On that southernmost island originated the family which reigned, at first locally and then inclusively, until some time after the middle of the last century.

It is well to draw the attention of readers to the pronunciation of Hawaiian words as they are expressed with Roman letters. Every vowel, either when alone or if connected with a consonant, marks a distinct syllable. All pure Hawaiian vocables may be represented by twelve letters, a, e, i, 0, u, h, k, I, m, n, p, w. A is pronounced as m father; e as in they; i as in marine; 0 as in note; u as in rule (never as in mule, that is, yu). In a very few words the a is slightly shortened until it approximates that of u in tuh. In the compounds of waho, as ia waho, the outside, and in Oahu, name of one of the islands, a has the very broad sound given it in jail. In other words, the vowels have the Italian sounds and the consonants the English. If double vowels appear, each is sounded, and when the same vowel is repeated in juxtaposition, there are to be two separate syllables: Ha-wa-i-i-an, not Hawahyan! Every word, and syllable must end with a vowel, and no two consonants are ever heard without an intervening vowel sound: there is no exception to this rule.

In quite a number of words there is a guttural break, or catching of the breath, between two vowels. This is occasionally noticed at the beginning of the word, but it is much more frequent in the middle. Fundamentally the break denotes a consonant which is actually an essential part of the word: almost invariably it takes the place of the South Sea k; thus the Polynesian ika,_ fish, becomes i^a in Hawaiian. In writing Hawaiian, the break is indicated by an apostrophe or hyphen: correct pronunciation must be acquired from competent lips; but further examples may be given with ae, to assent, a-e to pass over, to embark: wau, I, wa^u, to scratch. There is a great distinction, at times, between long and short vowels which alters the meaning without any logical connection: thus kaula means a rope; but kaula, a prophet. Further interesting linguistic features will be noticed later.

The earliest history of the Hawaiian people is altogether like that of human beings who were in a condition of savagery or barbarism, when gauged by our standards of culture and civiKsation. Their origin is still somewhat obscure, although ethnologists have been able, of late years, to clear away some of that obscurity, as will be apparent when the ethnic relations of the Hawaiians are discussed in a later chapter. The fables and historical as well as sacred mele (there is no inflectional distinction between singular and plural) or songs do not throw much light on this subject of origin, yet there is a certain uniformity in the earliest traditions and customs, which the Hawaiians share with Other peoples of Oceanica, that points towards a common origin.

After Americans and Europeans, who were interested in ethnological studies, and these were practically all Christian (Protestant) missionaries, had become sufficiently familiar with the Hawaiians to have learnt the language, they found that the oldest people declared there was originally a time of perpetual night, when "the earth was without form and void," and all things were in a state of chaos; that was, of course, before the earth was created. Of what there now is of the material universe, there was nothing; even the whole list of the gods had not been completed.

By the action of some of the gods there was brought about the "state of light," or the creation, by a transition from darkness to light. "Hawaii was said to have been produced from a large egg, deposited by an immense bird upon the water, which bursting, formed the present island." From that first land, the other islands of the group developed automatically. But there is a suspiciously famihar ring to nearly all the traditions dealing with creation, the birth of man, and cognate subjects, which leads the unprejudiced (not to say sceptical) observer to suspect outside influence long before the time of Cook's visit.

The conservative Hawaiians of early days, in the intercourse with strangers that developed soon after Cook's "discovery," stoutly held the opinion that the first human inhabitants of the islands descended from the gods, or were created by a miracle upon the islands. Others, less tied and bound to old superstition, contended that the creation of man took place in another part of the ocean, far away in the South Sea; and that the first human beings who lived in Hawaii came from a long way off. There is no doubt that there was formerly frequent communication between the various groups of Pacific islands, even a very long time ago.

Tradition and more substantial evidence point to the fact that the canoes were larger, better built and equipped, and more seaworthy in the remote past than they have been for several centuries. Some of the circumstances mentioned in legends make it not at all impossible that large proas, patterned after the typical Malay craft, brought to Hawaii the first human inhabitants of these islands./ The behevers in this origin of the populating of Hawaii said that the first-comers brought with them from Tahiti, a hog, a dog, and a pair of barnyard fowls. Before venturing to land upon what was admitted to have been an uninviting coast, and to take possession of the then uninhabited islands, these people prayed to the gods for permission to do so, and their request was granted.

Later, apparently, a chief came with^^his immediate family and settled on one of the northern islands, Kauai. One of his sons, who is given in tradition the name of Kamapiikai, "a child running over the seas," made several most venturesome voyages, probably back to Tahiti or, possibly, even farther. On his return to Kauai from one of those journeys, he reported having found a spring from which flowed wai-ola-loa, ''the water of enduring Hfe." This water possessed, so it was declared, all the miraculous powers attributed by

Ponce de Leon to the mythical spring, ''The Fountain of Youth," which he sought for throughout Florida in 15 1 2, but in vain. The Hawaiians were so greatly impressed by this tale that Kamapiikai, who is sometimes called ''The Hawaiian Columbus," easily persuaded enough of them to man several double canoes to join him in another voyage. They sailed away to gain "perpetual hfe" and were never heard of again, and, if they did sail, sufficient reason for the disappearance is to be found in the fact that practically all the company were sorely in need of the rejuvenating power of the miraculous water. Their physical condition totally unfitted them for strenuous adventure; because they were aged or infirm, deformed or ugly, maimed or diseased.

Another so-called old Hawaiian legend that must be branded as of suspicious originaHty is the following: "A tradition of the flood Hkewise exists, which states that all the land, except the summit of Mauna Kea, was overflowed by copious rains and risings of the waters. Some of the inhabitants preserved themselves in a laau, a vessel whose height, length and breadth were equal, and which was filled with men, food and animals. This laau, after floating awhile, finally rested upon Mauna Kea. The waters then subsided and the people went forth and dwelt in the land. This flood is called Kaiakahinalii, the great deluge of Hinalii."* Mauna Kea, as a mountain, will be referred to later; but it is interesting to note here that the Hawaiian myth-makers selected the highest peak of their country

* Jarves, James Jackson, History of the Hawaiian Islands, 1872.

— as, indeed, it is in the whole of Oceanica — as their Ararat. Just why there should be such discrepancy in the proportions of the two ''Arks" is inexpHcable.

It is difficult to beheve that the Hawaiian tradition, which represents one of their semi-divine ancestors as emulating the act of Joshua in commanding the sun to stand still, can have been evolved without something of foreign influence. Maui, a superhuman being if he was not actually a god and whose name is perpetuated in that of the second largest island of the group, is declared to have stretched forth his hand to arrest the sun in its course, in order that his wife might have time to finish a certain task which she had begun and was anxious to complete before darkness came on. The contrast between Hawaiian gallantry and Jewish military zeal is refreshing.

It is amusing to note that some of the earliest American missionaries found — at the time when they were first able to pursue their investigations — conclusive evidence, to their minds, that the Hawaiians sprang from the lost ten tribes of Israel. The Rev. S. Dibble, in his History of the American Mission, 1843, gives much space to tracing the parallels between customs and traditions of the Hawaiians and the ceremonies and scripture of the Jews. But then, as has been said by a witty writer, if those ''lost tribes" were really the progenitors of all the peoples of this earth who have been traced back to the Israehtes by somebody or other, the word "lost" is very much of a misnomer.

It is well, therefore, to give careful consideration to the probability, which really amounts almost to certainty, that the Hawaiians had been brought under European influence fully two centuries and more before Cook visited them. It is practically incontestable that the myths and legends, which the first American missionaries mistook for true native folklore and tales, were simply the survival or revival of what the people had been told by former visitors, Europeans.

Before proceeding to mention some of the probable visits of Europeans to the Hawaiian Islands, prior to Cook's era, it should be noted that our lack of precise information is entirely due to the timidity or secretiveness of the Spaniards. These last mentioned people commenced to send a galleon each year (at least) from Mexico to the Philippines early in the sixteenth century. The westward bound vessel carried cargo of no very great value to Spain's enemies or freebooters generally : but the returning ship was often fully laden with the riches of the East that were very tempting to rovers of the' sea, and at that time there was not much respect shown by power to the rights of property in weaker hands.

Therefore, if the Hawaiian Islands were known to the Spaniards, they probably suppressed that knowledge as well as they could, in order that open enemies and pirates might not seek shelter amongst them and be ready to pounce upon the galleons returning to Mexico from Manila. Yet the existence of the Hawaiian Islands was not preserved as a complete secret, because their position is pretty accurately marked on a very old chart of the Pacific. There is Httle doubt that Cook knew of that chart, and that in shaping his lO THE COMING HAWAII

course from Tahiti, ostensibly bound for the far north to execute that part of his orders which required him to study the west coast of North America and determine the practicability of a passage round the northern end of the continent, he was not actually sailing into unknown seas. He did not so much *' discover the Sandwich Islands," in the present sense of the word; that is "to obtain sight or knowledge of (something previously unknown) for the first time,'' as in the now obsolete meaning, which was ''to bring into fuller knowledge: to explore." Cook's statement that the natives declared, when his squadron appeared, "they had never been visited by Europeans," contains either a mistake or a misapprehension.

Diego de Becerra and Hernando de Grijalva sailed from Mexico in 1533, and described an island, in the South Sea, 20° 30' north latitude, and about 100° west longitude from Paris, which they called St. Thomas; probably Socorro of the Revilla Gigedo group off the end of Lower California. As they continued their course due west, there is reason to believe they sighted the Hawaiian Islands.

On the first day of November, 1542, Juan Gaetan (or Gaetano) and Bertrand della Torre sailed from the Puerto de la Natividad, JaHsco Province, Mexico. After going towards the westward for thirty days and making, by dead reckoning, nine hundred leagues, they came to a number of islands to which they gave the name "The Islands of Kings." They extend from the ninth to the eleventh parallels of latitude in longitude 187°. Twenty leagues farther they found other

Hawaiian Grass House and Cocoanut Grove

EARLY HISTORY II

islands, to which they gave the name ''Coral Islands," latitude io°, longitude 182°. Next they came to others which were covered with a beautiful green, and well planted with palm-trees; therefore these were called ''The Garden," latitude 9° 30', longitude 177°. The inhabitants of all these islands appeared to the inexperienced observers to be very much the same in general characteristics. They were poor people, wearing nothing but a little rag to cover their nudity; some of the islanders had fowls Kke those of Spain. Two hundred and eighty leagues west, but in the same latitude as the Coral Islands, they found a more prosperous island which they called "The Sailor." The inhabitants seemed to be inoffensive people and gave the Spaniards fish and cocoanuts. Three leagues west was the much larger island of Arezisa, some twenty-five leagues in circumference. The visitors saw many palm-trees, but did not land, being anxious to reach the Philippines.* Now, while the longitude, reckoned, as was the custom with those Spanish navigators, from Paris, might enable us to locate the Hawaiian Islands, the latitude, which we should naturally expect to be rather more precise, is altogether unsatisfactory. But this discrepancy may readily be accounted for in several ways: first, by the secrecy that has been mentioned; second, by strange miscalculation; third, error on the part of the recorders, either intentional or accidental. There is little doubt but that Gaetano's

* Confr. Collander, John, Terra Australis Cognita: or Voyages to the Terra Australia, or Southern Hemisphere, during the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries. Edinburgh, 1766, 3 vols. Vol. I, p. 203, Article XI.

"Coral Islands" were the Hawaiians. Change the degrees of latitude to nineteen and twenty-one and the true latitude is found; while the distance west gives the longitude very closely.

On the old chart, already alluded to, made by the captain or pilot of one of the galleons plying between Mexico and the Philippines, the islands La Mesa, Los Major, and La Desgraciada are indicated in just about the position of the Hawaiians; and later visitors gave to the high mountain, Mauna Loa, Hawaii, the name "The Table," which is precisely the same as La Mesa. That chart was known to the British Admiralty (Navy Department) in the eighteenth century, and may easily have been accessible to Cook.

But there are other, accepted, accounts of European visitors. In the reign of King Kahaukapu, a kahuna, priest, appeared at the northwest point of Hawaii Island. He was white and had with him two "idols," as the natives called them. One was undoubtedly a sacred image; while the other was probably a crucifix. This happened somewhere between 1530 and 1600. Paulo, or as the Hawaiians gave it, Paao, must have broken one of the vows of the Roman Catholic priesthood, for his son, Opili, succeeded his father in his religious offices. It is to the teachings of this Spaniard that the striking similarity between so-called native legends and biblical stories must be traced.

In 1620, most probably, a vessel was wrecked on the south side of Hawaii Island, and only the captain and a woman, said to have been his sister, were saved and kindly treated by the natives. Both married

Hawaiians and founded a mixed race from which a number of chiefs and common people claim descent. These are^ to this day, distinguished from pure Hawaiians by features and complexion. Other verified cases of intercourse between Hawaiians and Europeans, as well as many which are more or less apocryphal, prior to 1778, Cook's date, might be cited. When Cook arrived, he found the natives had two pieces of iron; one is described as a bit of barrel-hoop, the other was probably part of a broadsword. The people were said to be more anxious to get iron than anything else which the British offered in barter. They called it hemaite, a name that must be admitted to have a strong resemblance to the Spanish word hematites.

One would naturally expect to find in Blair and Robertson's great work * some tolerably full information about the Hawaiian Islands, taken from the log-books of the galleons crossing and re-crossing the Pacific. This is not the case, however; and the reason doubtless is that such entries, if made, were struck out and the information suppressed. It is entirely clear, nevertheless, that the existence of the group was well known to Europeans; and, as Mr. Jarves observes, the great navigator was too much addicted to "a silence in regard to the maritime efforts of his predecessors."

* The Philippine Islands, I4gj~i8g8.

Chapter II Later History

INASMUCH as the death of Captain Cook may be said to mark, in a most melancholy way, the transition from conditions which were virtually unaffected by foreign influence, to one of an absolutely different character, it is well to give some consideration to that most lamentable episode. Because, while it has been shown that the Hawaiian people had known Europeans long before Cook visited them, yet it was apparent to him and those who were with him, as well as those foreigners who promptly followed him, that the personal influence of those earlier visitors had been almost effaced; while the material effect which they had momentarily exerted was very unimportant. Furthermore, the catastrophe gives an illuminating idea of the character of the Hawaiian people towards the end of the eighteenth century. Whatever may have been Cook's faults, it cannot be denied that it was through his efforts the Hawaiian Islands became properly known to Americans and Europeans; and that from his visit dates the development of the country and its people along lines which have already been productive of marvellous results, and which must broaden and deepen as time passes. Still, assuming that Cook had not carried out his third voyage, Americans may reasonably say that if European whalers had not found the Hawaiian Islands, our New Bedford ships would have done so; for early in the nineteenth century some of those vessels were in the North Pacific.

There are several accounts of Cook's death which, as is to be expected, differ from one another in details only. Yet even the most charitable of these stories cannot suppress the fact that Cook's weak vanity was largely responsible for the disaster. In every narrative the fact is made to appear more or less conspicuous that the EngUsh captain, upon reahsing that the ignorant and superstitious Hawaiians were disposed to attribute to him godlike qualities, permitted this gross and unseemly misapprehension to continue. If he did not actually and openly receive the homage due a divinity (although he does seem to have done so!), he certainly conducted himself in a way that his critics loudly condemned and his friends found it impossible to condone.

The primary cause for the outburst which ended in the death of the famous navigator was punishment inflicted upon petty thieves. Undoubtedly some chastisement was needed; as much to deter others as to mortify the immediate offenders and lower them in the estimation of their personal friends. A desire for revenge naturally developed, and Cook's own courage and temerity in trying to suppress this led to his murder. Yet his look inspired consternation to the last, and it was not until his back was turned that he received his death-blow; only when he lay a lifeless corpse did the superstitious natives come to see that he was, like themselves, merely a human being. With the complete wreck of their belief in the superhumanity of Cook, came a loss of respect for the rest of the white people who were with him; this was to have disastrous results, for a time.

Cook had been desperately annoyed by innumerable attempts at petty pilfering — too many of them exasperatingly successful. One day a native had tried to steal the tongs of the Resolution's armourer, but was caught in the act and flogged. Later in the same day, another took the same implement and plunged overboard. Although followed by a ship's boat, the fellow succeeded in swimming to the shore, and escaped with his prize. That night, the Resolution' s cutter, moored close to the ship, was taken so quietly that the theft was not discovered until morning. This made Cook furious and he gave way to his anger completely. He went on shore to seize the boat, and planned to bring off the local king as a peaceful hostage until restitution had been made. Then, according to a translation made from Hawaiian official papers, which were prepared as soon as the natives acquired the art of writing, the captain insisted upon the king's restoring the cutter; but this was impossible because the boat had been broken up to get what iron there was. Captain Cook had taken a party of armed marines, intending to bring the king, Kalaniopuu, on board his ship and detain him until the boat was given back or satisfactory compensation made. While Cook was trying to accomplish his purpose, Kekuhaupio crossed the bay from Keeia to Kaawaloa, accompanied by KaHmu, another chief, in a separate canoe. For some inex-

LATER HISTORY I7

plicable reason they were fired upon from the Resolution and Kalimu was killed. Thereupon Kekuhaupio rowed rapidly to Kaawaloa, where Cook and King Kalaniopuu were, and used his influence to dissuade the latter from going with Cook; although the king appears to have been quite willing to do so.

When the people learnt of Kalimu's death, they cried out for revenge, and one man, with a short dagger in his hand, approached Cook in a threatening manner. The captain, apprehensive of danger, fired his gun at the man, and this brought on a general broil. Cook struck Kalaimano-kahoowaha, another chief, with his sword; whereupon the chief caught the captain and held him, but with no thought of killing him; because Lono, Cook's title with the natives, being a god, could not die. But when Cook cried out and was about to fall, having been struck in the back, the chief concluded he was a man — not a god — and thereupon killed him.

Then the foreigners in their boat fired their muskets, and many of the natives were killed or wounded, because the mats which they held as shields against spears and arrows were no protection against bullets. The ship also fired cannon and killed other natives, so that King Kalaniopuu fled inland to the precipice with his chiefs and people taking with them the bodies of Cook and four marines, who had been killed in the fight.

The king then presented the body of Cook in sacrifice, and after the ceremoney was concluded he had the flesh removed from the bones, to preserve them. All of this, it must be understood, were acts of reverence as to a royal personage. Most of the flesh was burnt, but some of it, as well as a number of bones, was recovered by the EngHsh and given Christian burial; although a few of the bones were retained by the priests for a short time, and worshipped by them and their followers. Cook's heart was eaten by some children who said they had mistaken it for that of a dog; these culprits were subsequently severely chastised.

Cook's death of course terminated the reverence which had been held for the god Lono, and the natives now appeared in their true character. ''They endeavoured to allure small parties ashore, and insulted the comrades of the slain with the most contemptuous looks and gestures; at the same time displaying their clothes and arms in insolent triumph. A breastwork was also erected on the beach, and the women sent inland. Intercourse, however, was re-estabUshed, with the design of obtaining the corpse of Cook and the cutter. Several natives came off from time to time to the ships, declaring their innocence, and informed the commander, Clerke, of the warlike preparations ashore. Two individuals, on the night of the 15th [February, 1779], brought off a portion of the flesh of Captain Cook, weighing nine or ten pounds. The remainder, they said, had been burnt, and the bones were in possession of the chiefs. The next day additional insults were received, and a man, wearing Cook's hat, had the audacity to approach the ships and throw stones, in bravado. The crews not being in a temper for further forbearance, with the permission of their commander, fired some of the great guns at the natives on shore.