THE LEGACY OFTHE 1848 MAHELE AND KULEANA ACTOF 1850

THE LEGACY OF THE 1848 MAHELE AND KULEANA ACT OF 1850:

A CASE STUDY OF THE LA'IE WAI AND LA'IE MALO'O AHUPUA'A, 1846-1930

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITYOF HAWAI'I IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF ARTS

IN

PACIFIC ISLANDS STUDIES

AUGUST 1997

By

Jeffrey S. Stover

Thesis Committee

Terence Wesley-Smith, ChairmanDavid ChappellMarion Kelly

We certify that we have read this thesis and that, in our opinion, it is satisfactory

in scope and quality as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in Pacific Islands Studies.

THESIS COMMITTEE

II

© Copyright 1997

Jeffreyb? Stover

111

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Several individuals and organizations assisted me in acquiring information for this

thesis. I acknowledge their help and give special thanks to Kirk Henrichsen and Randy

Dixon who assisted me in locating materials at the Historical Department of the Church of

Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I further acknowledge Hawaii Reserves Incorporated in

allowing me to research their records, and the staff at the Hawaii State Archives for their

patience and help.

I acknowledge and thank the members of this thesis committee who have patiently

remained with me during the course of my writing this work. I deeply express my

gratitude to my wife, Cristina, whose love, guidance, and support have given me the

incentive to finish this study.

I dedicate this book to my unborn child in hopes that as he or she grows that he

might understand and appreciate the trials and sacrifices that Kanaka Maoli have made in

building up the community he calls home.

iv

ABSTRACT

The 1848 Mahele and Kuleana Act of 1850 transformed the Kanaka Maoli land

tenure system into one of private ownership. This study examines this transformation at

the basic unit of the Kanaka Maoli land tenure system, the ahupua'a. The ahupua'a chosen

for this study were La'ie Wai and La'ie Malo'o (La'ie) because they have and continue to

be the focus of great controversy in regards to Kanaka Maoli land alienation.

Part I of this thesis examines the process of land privatization and its initial effects

on the Kanaka Maoli of La'ie while Part II examines the history of La'ie's Land

Commission Awards between 1850-1930. This examination focusses on the legacy of

Kanaka Maoli land alienation attributed to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

and Zions Securities Corporation in La'ie.

v

T ABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements .Abstract .List of Tables .List of Figures .Chapter 1: Introduction .

Statement of Problem .Scope of Study .

Part I .Chapter 2: The Process of Land Privatization .

Hereditary Succession and Factors of Change .The Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles .The 1848 Mahele .The Process of Land Alienation .Kuleana Act of 1850 .The Continued Steps of Alienation .Royal Patents .The Foundation for Continued Alienation .

Cha~~~~~e i846'-i 848' P~p~l~ti~~ ~i L~'i~ '. '. ~ : : : .' .' '. '. ~ :The First Censuses of Ui'ie .1846-1848 Populations: The Problem With Census Records .Summary of Land Commission Records' Population Analysis .

Cha;t~~f~e fuiti~I'AI~~~ati~~ ~f "Ai~~ k L~'i~, '1846-i853 . : : : : : : : : : : : : :Non-ClaImants of La Ie .Claimants of Ui'ie Registering Only Claims .Non-Awarded Testimony Claimants ofUi'ie .

1. Before Dyi!lg They Gave Up Their Claim to Others .2. Claimed 'Ama of Other Maka'ainana .3. Died Without Heirs .4. Deserted the Claim .5. Failed to Cultivate 'Aina .6 D'd tT t'f t 'A-' . L-". I no es I y 0 ma m a Ie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7. Gave up the'Aina .8. Failed to Pay Taxes .9. Failed to Attend Poalima . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10. Overlapping Claims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11. Repeated ~laim . . . . . . . . . '. . . '.' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Non-Awarded ClaIms Do Not Equal AlIenatIon .Problems With the Land Commission Awards .Reasons for Discrepancies .Discrepancies Between the Testimonies and Awards .

Blanket Objection .Specific Claim Alienation .Miscellaneous .Special Note: Pahale Omissions .

Cha;t~~fckntifY~gthe'L~d'C~n'I~is~io~'A~~d~ ~ci "Ap~n~'ofL~"i~' '. ~ ~ : :Misreading the mdices ofA wards ..............._..............Verification of the La'ie Land Commission Awards and 'Apana .The Trouble With Ivins' Numbers .Results of The 1931 La'ie Tax Maps Analysis .One Final Attempt .Summary .

vi

IV

VVlll

XII25689

11121314161718192021242627272930313232323232323233333333353739404042424344464850515255

Chapter 6: Conclusions to Part I 57Part II 59

Chapter 7: The 'Aina ofUi'ie and its].egacy 60Chapter 8: The History of the Ui'ie 'Aina 64

Ui'ie and the Callto PaIawai, Lana'i 65The Purchase of La'ie 67The 'Aina and George Nebeker 70'Awa and the Kahana Hui, 1873-1878 73Drought, Rice, and Wells, 1878-1892 75Mortgaged Foreclosures on the 'Apana of La'ie, 1874.:1930 80The Migration to Iosepa and the. ~ffects on the La' ie 'Apana, 1869-1917 '" 81ExpansIOn, Wooley, and AcqulSltIOn, 1895-1919 85Deed Exchanges 88Fact Versus Legacy 90Zions Securities Corporation 96Zions Securities Corporation's Legacy of Adverse Possession in La'ie 99

Chapter 9: Conclusions 103AppendIx A: Land Commission Records Analysis for Ui'ie 107

Land Commission Awardees of Ui'ie 108Non-Awarded Testimony Claimants of La'ie 109Relatives Mentioned in the Testimonies and Awards of La'ie 109La'ie Claimants Registering Only Claims 110Names Mentioned in Claims of La'ie 110Sun:tmary of Land CO~llI~ission Records' P~,I?ulation Analysis 111

AppendIx B: Land CommIssIon Awardees of La Ie 112Appendix C: Non-Awarded Testimony Claimants of La'ie 115Appendix D: Pre-1848 Claimants' Rela!!ves of La'ie 116Appendix E: Post-1848 Cultivators of 'Aina in La'ie Mentioned in Testimonies and

Awards 117Appendix F: La'ie Claim@ts Registering Only Claims 118Appendix G: Pre-1848 'Aina_Cultivators of Ui'ie 119Appendix H: Objections and 'Aina Alienation 120Appendix I: Indices of Awards for Ui'ie 122Appendix J: Nawai's L.c.A. 9894 124Appendix K: An Analysis ofthe La'ie Tax Maps 125

Analysis of Tax Maps 125Map 1 127Map 4 130Map 5 131Map 6 133Map 7 Note 135Map 8 ~ 135Special Note: A Duplicated 'Apana 142Map 9 143Map 13 145Map 17 147Map 7 149Summary of Analysis _ 152

Appendix L: La'ie Tax MaQs Wihtout 'Apana 153Appendix M: Location of 'Apana in La' ie .. '-' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155Appendix N: La'ie's Previously Unlofated 'Apana 158Appendix 0: Discrepancie~in La'ie's 'Apana Acreage 159Append~x P: Acreage.of 'Apana}~ I;a'ie :.: 160AppendIx Q: Deed HIStOry of La Ie s Land CommIssIon Awards 163Appendix R: Residents of Iosepa, Utah 187Works Cited 189

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Pa&e

1. The 1831-1832 & 1835-1836 Population of Ui' ie 20

2. Census Data 22

3. The 1846-1848 Estimated Population of Ui' ie 23

4. Derived Populations From 1835-1836 Ratios 25

5. Maka' ainana Losing Interest in 'Aina During Each Stage 27

6. Number of Land Commission Awards and 'Apana in La'ie 45

7. The Unlocated 'Apana of La'ie 52

8. Land Commission Awardees of La'ie 112

9. Non-Awarded Testimony Claimants of La'ie 115

10. Pre-1848 Claimants' Relatives of La'ie 116

11 . Post-1848 Cultivators of La' ie Mentioned in Testimonies and Awards . . . .. 117

12. Ui'ie Claimants Registering Only Claims 118

13. Pre-1848 'Aina Cultivators of La' ie 119

14. Objections and 'Aina Alienation Between Testimonies and Awards 120

15. Indices of Awards for La'ie 122

16. Historical Record of the 'Apana in Tax Map 1 ofLa'ie 128

17. Historical Record of the 'Apana in Tax Map 4 of La' ie 130

18. Historical Record of the'Apana in Tax Map 5 of La'ie 131

19. Historical Record of the'Apana in Tax Map 6 of La'ie 133

20. Historical Record ofthe 'Apana in Tax Map 8 of La'ie 137

21. Full Historical Record of the 'Apana in Tax Map 8 of La'ie .. 139

22. Historical Record of the 'Apana in Tax Map 9 of La'ie 143


24. Historical Record of the 'Apana in Tax Map 17 ofUi'ie 147


26. Historical Record ofUi'ie Tax Map 2 153

viii

27. Historical Record ofUi'ie Tax Map 3 153

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

Historical Record ofUi'ie Tax Map 10

Historical Record of Ui'ie Tax Map 11

Historical Record ofUi'ie Tax Map 12



Historical Record of La' ie Tax Map 16

La t· f 'A- . L-"ca Ion 0 pana m a Ie .

La'ie's Previously Unlocated 'Apana .

Discrepancies in La' ie's 'Apana Acreage .

A f 'A- . L-"creage 0 pana m a Ie .

Deed History of La'ie's Land Commission Awards .

IX

153

153

153

153

154

154

155

157

159

160

164

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure

1. Ui'ie Wai and Ui'ie Ma1o'o Ahupua'a: Ui'ie, Ko'olau1oa, O'ahu 19

2. Nawai's L.c.A. 9894 124

3. Ui'ie's Seventeen Tax Maps 126

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

'Apana in Annotated Tax Map 1 ofLa'ie

'Apana in Annotated Tax Map 4 of La'ie


'Apana in Annotated Tax Map 6ofLa'ie


129

130

132

134

138

9. Ke1iiwaiwaio1e's duplicated 'apana: L.C.A. 8580.1 andL.C.A. 8580.5 142

10. 'Apana in Annotated Tax Map 9 of La'ie 144

11.

12.



146

148

13. 'Apana in Annotated Tax Map 7 of La'ie 151

x

CHAPTER 1INTRODUCTION

The 1848 Mahele and the Kuleana Act of 1850 transformed the Kanaka Maoli

(Hawaiian) land tenure system into one of private ownership.! This transformation initially

alienated the 'iiina (land) from seventy percent of Klinaka Maoli (native people) and retained

less than one percent of it for the maka'iiinana (commoners). The system of private land

ownership instituted the continued alienation of the 'aina from Kanaka Maoli over the next

150 years. Scholars have written extensively on both the process of land privatization and

subsequent land alienation, but their work examines these events as they pertain to the

entire Kingdom of Hawai'i.2 This study, in contrast, examines the process of land

privatization and its subsequent effects on Kanaka Maoli within two specific ahupua 'a,

those of La'ie Wai and La'ie Malo'o.3

Statement of Problem

To date, minimal research exists on how the process of land privatization initially

affected Kanaka Maoli within specific ahupua' a. This lack of research has left scholars to

describe the process of land privatization and its effects on each ahupua'a's population in

1 All definitions of Hawaiian words, unless otherwise noted, come from Mary Kawena Pukui andSamuel H. Elbert, Hawaiian Dictionary: Hawaiian-English English-Hawaiian, rev. ed. (Honolulu:University of Hawai'i Press, 1986).

2 Works on the process of land alienation include: Curtis J. Lyons "Land Matters in Hawaii," parts 47, The Islander 1, no. 21 (1875): 126-127; no. 22 (1875): 135; no. 23 (1875): 143; no. 24 (1875):150151.; William D. Alexander, "A Brief History of Land Titles in the Hawaiian Kingdom," in The HawaiianAlmanac and Annual for 1891 (Honolulu: Thomas G. Thrum, 1890), 105-124.; Jon J. Chinen, The GreatMahele Hawaii's Land Division of 1848 (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1956).; LilikaIaKame'eleihiwa, Native Land and Foreign Desires (Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press, 1992).

For works on the subsequent alienation of the 'aina from Kanaka Maoli see: J. M. Lydgate, "TheVanishing Kuleana," in The Hawaiian and Almanac for 1915 (Honolulu: Thomas G. Thrum, 1914), 103109.; Jean Hobbs, Hawaii's Pageant of the Soil (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1935).;Andrew Lind, An Island Community: An Ecological Succession in Hawaii (New York: Greenwood Press,1968).; Noel J. Kent, Hawaii Under the Influence (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1983).; Linda S.Parker, Native American Estate: The Struggle Over Indian and Hawaiian Lands (Honolulu: University ofHawai'i Press, 1989).

3 An ahupua' a is a land division which extends from the mountains to the sea.

1

alienation figures and patterns that were developed to explain how the process affected the

entire Kingdom of Hawai'i. The application of such findings to an ahupua'a's population

assumes that each population was similarly affected by the process of land privatization.

Although each ahupua'a population encountered the process of land privatization, they dealt

with it in their own manner. Consequently, each ahupua'a's history contains patterns of

adaptation and land alienation particular to its population. These patterns give insight into

the initial effects ofland privatization within that ahupua'a. Moreover, they provide a

greater understanding of the initial effects of land privatization throughout the Kingdom of

Hawai'i. This understanding can only be acquired, however, through analyzing the

process of land privatization at the level of the ahupua'a.

The legacy of the 1848 Mahele and the Kuleana Act of 1850 is one of Kanaka Maoli

land alienation. Although scholars have studied this legacy from cultural, social, political,

and economic perspectives, they have not examined this alienation from the keystone of the

Kanaka Maoli land tenure system, the ahupua'a. To date, Robert Stauffer's dissertation on

Kahana remains the only work that provides a detailed history of the' aina within an

ahupua'a.4 His study provides new insights into how Kanaka Maoli resisted land

alienation through institutions such as the hui ('aina corporation) and how the introduction

of new laws such as the Mortgage Act of 1874 eventually alienated the 'aina from Kahana's

awardees. As such, Stauffer's work demonstrates the need to study the ahupua'a as the

basic unit of analysis in order to gain a deeper understanding of the history of land

alienation in Hawai'i.

Scope of Study

This thesis analyzes the initial effects of land privatization and subsequent Kanaka

Maoli land alienation in the ahupua'a of La'ie Wai and La'ie Malo'o between 1846-1930.

The ahupua'a of La'ie Wai and La'ie Malo'o (La'ie) were chosen for this study because

they have been and continue to be the focus of great controversy in respect to the

4 Robert Stauffer, "Land Tenure in Kahana, Hawai'i, 1846-1920" (PhD. diss.: University of Hawai'i,1990).

2

acquisition of Kanaka Maoli land by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and

Zions Securities Corporation. Much of this controversy arises from unsubstantiated claims

being represented as fact. This study examines several of these claims and attempts to

clarify them through documenting the history of land privatization and subsequent land

alienation within these ahupua' a. In doing so, this thesis attempts to provide data for those

individuals and groups engaged in the ongoing debate over land ownership in Ui'ie.

This thesis also demonstrates the problems inherent in doing research of this nature and

provides guidelines for researchers by showing them the detailed processes used to

overcome these difficulties.

To meet these objectives, this thesis is divided into two parts. Part I describes the

process of land privatization and its initial effects on the Kanaka Maoli of La'ie. This part

demonstrates through a detailed analysis of La' ie's censuses and Land Commission records

that land alienation within an ahupua'a cannot be described in terms of population. In the

process, this analysis reveals that the La'ie ahupua'a was not a closed unit as the Kanaka

Maoli of other ahupua' a utilized its resources. This condition prevents one from

determining the number of Kanaka Maoli in La'ie whose 'aina was alienated by the process

of land privatization.

Nevertheless, this thesis employs an alternative approach to examine the initial land

alienation within La'ie caused by the process of land privatization. This approach focusses

on identifying patterns ofland alienation that explain why the maka'ainana of La'ie did not

make claims or failed to receive the claims they made. The identification of these reasons

provides new insights into the initial effects of land privatization and the subsequent

alienation caused by it.

Before conducting any extended analysis of Kanaka Maoli land alienation the

number of Land Commission Awards and their corresponding 'apana (pieces) must be

identified within a study area. Most researchers calculate these figures by counting the

number of Land Commission Award entries in the Indices ofA wards and their

3

corresponding' apana.5 This thesis demonstrates that these entries not only contain errors,

but that corresponding 'apana do not always exist within the ahupua'a under which the

award appears. This thesis attempts to overcome these errors by using the original Land

Commission Awards and tax maps to identify the number of Land Commission Awards

and 'apana in La'ie.

After identifying the number Land Commission Awards and their corresponding

'apana in La'ie, this thesis moves into Part II which reviews the history of La'ie between

1850-1930. This review examines the legacy of Kanaka Maoli land alienation attributed to

the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and Zions Securities Corporation in La'ie

during the operation of the La'ie Plantation, which closed in 1930. This examination

analyzes several of the claims made as to how the Church and Zions obtained interest in

126 'apana in La'ie and derives conclusions based upon this analysis.

5 Territory of Hawaii, Office of the Commissioner of Public Lands, Indices ofA wards Made by theBoard of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands (Honolulu: Star-Bulletin Press,1929).

4

PART I

CHAPTER 2THE PROCESS OF LAND PRIVATIZATION

Kanaka Maoli have had an intimate relationship with the 'aina since time

immemorial, viewing it as an elder sibling deserving of love, honor and service. l In return

for their devotion, Kanaka Maoli expected the 'aina to provide for all of their physical

needs. Based upon this familial view of the land, Kanaka Maoli divided and subdivided

the 'aina giving each piece a name "as individual and characteristic as that of its

cultivation."2 The largest division was the mokupuni (island) which consisted of several

okana/moku-o-loko (districts)) These okana/moku-o-Ioko were divided into ahupua'a

which were wedged shaped sections of land that extended from the mountains to the sea.

The resources of each ahupua'a were used by those maka'ainana who dwelt within its

borders.4 The ahupua'a was divided into 'iJj or 'iJj'aina which were further subdivided

into various smaller sections which the maka'ainana worked for their own subsistence or to

meet the demands of the AJj'i Nui (high chiefs) and Mo'i(paramount chief).

The Kanaka Maoli social structure mirrored these divisions of the 'aina with the

Mo'! at the top, supported by the Ali'i Nui, who were served by the konohiki (overseer),

who supervised the labor of the maka'ainana. Because each class had its distinct function,

all Kanaka Maoli played an integral role in the success of the society. Kanaka Maoli

historian David Malo described this social structure as it related to the' aina in this way:

1LilikaHi Kame'eleihiwa, Native Land and Foreign Desires (Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press, 1992),25.

2 Curtis J. Lyons, "Land Matters in Hawaii - No.1," The Islander 1, no. 18 (1875): 103.

3 David Malo, Hawaiian Antiquities, trans. Nathaniel B. Emerson (Honolulu: Hawaiian GazetteCompany, 1903), 36-39.

The names and division of 'iiina in several cases vary from island to island. For more information on'iiina divisions see E. S. Craighill Handy and Elizabeth Green Handy, Native Planters in Old Hawaii: TheirLife, Lore, and Environment (Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press, 1972),46-57.

4 Melody Kapilialoha MacKenzie, "Historical Background," in Native Hawaiian Rights Handbook, ed.Melody Kapilialoha MacKenzie (Honolulu: Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation: Office of Hawaiian Affairs,1991),4.

6

The commoners were the most numerous class of people in the nation, andwere known as ma-ka-aina-na....

The condition of the common people was that of subjection to the chiefs,compelled to do their heavy tasks, burdened and oppressed, some even to death....

If the people were slack in doing the chief's work they were expelled fromtheir lands, or even put to death....

Only a small portion of the kings and chiefs ruled with kindness; the largemajority simply lorded over the people.

It was from the common people, however, that the chiefs received their foodand their apparel for men and women, also their houses and many other things....

The ma-ka-aina-na were the fixed residents of the land; the chiefs were theones who moved about from place to place. It was the ma-ka-aina-na who did all thework on the land; yet all they produced from the soil belonged to the chiefs; and thepower to expel a man from the land and rob him of his possession lay with thechief.5

Two points from Malo's description of Kanaka Maoli society are particularly pertinent.

First, "The ma-ka-aina-na were the fixed residents of the land." This attachment to the 'aina

was not due to a feudalistic tie to a particular chief.6 Rather the attachment emanated from

the maka' ainana shedding their blood, sweat, and tears to miilama (care, nurture) the 'aina.

As such, the maka'ainana developed a familial bond with the 'aina upon which they lived

and relied for daily sustenance.

Second, "The chiefs were the ones who moved about from place to place." This

movement originated from two sources, war and death. When a Mo'l:lost in battle or died,

all of the' aina under his control, including his followers' 'aina, reverted to the new Mo'1.7

The new Mo'l: then kiilai'iiina (carved up) the 'aina among the Ali'i Nui. According to

Lilikala Kame'eleihiwa, the kalai'aina was "the most crucial first decision required of a new

Mo'ifor any offense given to an older and more powerful Ali'i Nui could lead to war and

the possibility of death...."8 Since each kalai'aina changed who had control over the

5 Malo, 87-88.

6 Maivan Lam, "The Imposition of Anglo-American Land Tenure on Hawaiians," Journal ofLegalPluralism and Unofficial Law23 (1984): 105.

7 Kame'eleihiwa, 51.

8 Ibid., 56.

7

'aina, the deaths and wars of the Mo'I prevented the Ali'i Nui from gaining any permanent

control over the' aina.9

Hereditary Succession and Factors of Chanl:e

The reversion of 'aina to the new Mo'I decreased to some degree after King

Kamehameha the Great. For in his kalai' aina, King Kamehameha stipulated that the four

Kona Ali'i Nui, who had served him during his rise to power, could pass their 'aina onto

their descendants. 10 This change along with the Western influence of foreign advisors and

Protestant missionaries created a desire among some Ali'i Nui for the wide scale practice of

hereditary succession of 'aina. This point is evident from the National Council meeting held

on June 6, 1825, in which Kauaikeaouli was sustained as King Kamehameha III and in

which Kalanimoku11

referred to the inconveniences arising from the reversion of lands to the king on thedeath of their occupants, a custom revived under Tamehameha II., but which it hadbeen the object of Tamehameha I. to exchange for that of hereditary succession. Thisproject ofthe their king he proposed to adopt as the law, excepting in such cases aswhen a chief or landholder should infringe the laws; then his lands should beforfeited. . . .1 2

According to Lord Byron, those Ali'i Nui present upon hearing this statement

exclaimed, "All the laws of the great Tamehameha were good; let us have the same."13

King Kamehameha III not only obliged these Ali'i Nui by not performing a kalai'aina, but

also gave them and the maka'ainana vested rights in the 'aina when he approved the 1840

9 Ibid., 83.

10 The four Ali'i Nui from Kona were Keaweaheulu, Ke'eaumoku, Kame'eiamoku, and Kamanawa.

11 Kalanimoku's status and position of responsibility within the Kingdom of Hawai'i was somewhatvague as shown in Ralph S. Kuykendall, The Hawaiian Kingdom 1778-1854: Foundation andTrasformation (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1938),430-434.

12 Lord Byron, Voyage of the H.M.S. Blonde to the Sandwich Islands in the Years 1824-1825(London: John Murray, 1826), 152-153.

13 Ibid., 153.

8

Constitution, which stated that the' aina "belonged to the chiefs and people in common, of

whom Kamehameha I was the head, and had the management of the landed property." 14

The 1840 Constitution also safeguarded these rights by stating that "protection is hereby

secured to the persons of all the people, together with their lands, their building lots, and all

their property...."15 However, the 1840 Constitution contained a provision whereby

these rights could be revoked "by express provision of the laws."16 Who needed to be

influenced to enact such laws? The King, who according to the same Constitution,

controlled all allodium to the 'aina and could still dispossess the Ali'i, maka'ainana, and

foreigners of their 'aina.

Many authors have written extensively on the factors which led King Kamehameha

III to privatize the land in Hawai'i. Collectively, their works suggest that the influence and

pressure of Western society, economics, and politics created a desire among foreigners and

some Ali'i to privatize the land. Neil Levy suggests that under these Western influences "the

land tenure system could neither maintain itself in face of a hostile foreign world nor

accommodate itself to the wishes of that world."17 Consequently, King Kamehameha III,

following the advice of his foreign councilors, established the Board of Commissioners to

Quiet Land Titles on December 10, 1845.

The Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles

The sole purpose of the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles (Land

Commission) was "the investigation and final ascertainment or rejection of all claims of

private individuals, whether natives or foreigners, to any landed property acquired anterior

14 Robert C. Lydecker, ed., Roster Legislatures ofHawaii, Constitutions ofMonarchy and Republic,Speeches ofSovereigns and President (Honolulu: The Hawaiian Gazette Company, 1918),9-10.

15 Ibid., 9.

16 Ibid.

17 Neil M. Levy, "Native Hawaiian Legal Rights," California Law Review 63, no. 4 (1975): 853.

9

to the passage of this act. ..."18 These powers did not give the Land Commission

"authority to create any new interest in the land," but rather authority to determine the

validity of a claim and bind both the claimant and the government to its verdict. 19

On August 20, 1846, the Land Commission established principles to guide them in

their work. These principles identified that "there are but three classes of persons having

vested rights in the lands,-l st, the government, 2nd, the landlord, and 3rd, the

tenant. ..."20 To identify the location of each individuals interest, the Land Commission

established a process whereby each adult male seeking to maintain his vested interest had to

file a claim, provide testimony, pay for a survey, and obtain a Royal Patent for it.

Although the Land Commission identified those individuals with vested interest in

the' aina and instituted a process to determine where these interest were located, it could not

"separate the undivided interests of the King, the chiefs and konohikis, and the

tenants-commoners in the lands...."21 This separation had to be ascertained by enactment

of law which was accomplished on December 18, 1847, when the Privy Council passed the

rules to establish the 1848 Mahele.

18 Kingdom of Hawai'i, Statute Laws ofHis Majesty Kamehameha III: King of the Hawaiian Islands;Passed by the Houses ofNobles and Representatives During the Twenty-First Year ofHis Reign, and TheThird and Fourth Years ofHis Public Recognition, A. D. 1845 and 1846, vol 1. (Honolulu: GovernmentPress, 1846), 107.

19 Jon J. Chinen, The Great Mahele Hawaii's Land Division of 1848 (Honolulu: University of Hawai'iPress, 1956),9.

William D. Alexander, "A Brief History of Land Titles in the Hawaiian Kingdom," in HawaiianAlmanac and Annual for 1891 (Honolulu: Thomas G. Thrum, 1890), 109.

20 "Principles Adopted by the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles, in Their Adjudication ofClaims Presented to Them," The Polynesian, 19 June 1847, 17.

21 Chinen, 12.

10

The 1848 Mahele

The 1848 Mahele divided the vested rights that King Kamehameha III and 245 chiefs

had in the' aina,22 This division took place under the auspices of a committee appointed by

the Privy Council before which:

all questions between the king and the chiefs were to be discussed, and settled bymutual consent of the king and each chief or landlord, after which the King and eachchief were to sign and seal the settlement that should be made, never thereafter to bedisturbed.23

In each settlement or quitclaim an Ali'i listed the 'aina he relinquished to the King and then

signed the quitclaim which stated that "I hereby agree that this division is good. The lands

above written are for the King. I have no more rights therein."24 The King in tum listed the

'aina he relinquished to the Ali'i and signed the quitclaim which stated, "I hereby agreed that

this division is good. The lands above written are for [name of the chief or konohiki]:

consent is given to take it before the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles."25

These quitclaims transpired between January 27, 1848, and March 7, 1848, and were

recorded in the Mahele Book.

Up until the 1848 Mahele, the Mo'!, Ali'i and maka'ainana all held undivided interest

in the' aina. According to the Privy Council, the purpose of the Mahele was to separate and

distinctly define "the undivided rights at present existing in the lands" for the "prosperity of

our Kingdom and the proper physical, mental and moral improvement of our people."26

The 1848 Mahele did not achieve these goals, but rather established a double standard of

22 MacKenzie, 7.

23 Alexander, 113.

24 Territory of Hawaii, Office of the Commissioner of Public Lands, The Mahele Book, quoted in Jon1. Chinen, The Great Mahele Hawaii's Land Division of 1848 (Honolulu: University of Hawai' i Press,1956), 16.

25 Ibid.

26 Alexander, 112.

11

identifying Kanaka Maoli interest in the 'liina which did not physically, mentally, or morally

improve the maka'ainana. To illustrate, the Mo'! and Ali'i quitclaimed their interest to each

other thereby establishing by mutual consent a distinct and divided interest in the 'aina. The

maka' ainana were not afforded this opportunity, but were forced to establish their interest in

the' aina through the process of filing a claim, providing testimony, paying for a survey,

and obtaining a Royal Patent. In other words, the Mo'! and Ali'i required the maka'ainana

to establish their interest in the 'aina instead of simply acknowledging it as they had done for

each other. This double standard alienated the 'aina from an increased number of

maka'ainana with each succeeding requirement,27

The Process of Land Alienation

The Land Commission required Kanaka Maoli to file claims so that their interest

could be identified. Only 14,195 out of approximately 29,200 males who represented

88,000 Kanaka Maoli filed claims by the February 14, 1848 deadline.28 This requirement

resulted in over fifty percent of all Kanaka Maoli being "forever barred of all right" to their

'aina by express provision of law,29

Speculation arises as to why more Kanaka Maoli did not submit claims. J. M.

Lydgate suggested that Kanaka Maoli felt filing was a waste of time and effort because "the

feudal chief would take the land away whenever it pleased him, as he had always done!"30

Lilikala Kame'eleihiwa states that the opposite is true, that the Kanaka Maoli did not file

claims because they "wished to maintain their dependency upon the Ali'i and that tenuous

27 The Ali'i, who participated in the Mahele, also had to submit their claims to the Land Commission,but the Mahele had already identified their interest in the 'aina. Therefore, the 'aina could only be alienatedfrom these Ali' i if they failed to file a claim or pay the commutation on their award.


29 Alexander, 109.Lydecker, 8.

30 J. M. Lydgate, "The Vanishing Kuleana," in The Hawaiian Almanac for 1915 (Honolulu: Thorn. G.Thrum, 1914), 104.

12

bond of aloha with someone more powerful."31 Finally, Ralph Kuykendall records one

commentator as stating that Kanaka Maoli did not file claims "because of lack of knowledge

as how to proceed."32 This final point is substantiated by the fact that the Land Commission

chose The Polynesian, an English language newspaper, to advertise and announce their

activities)3 This point is further supported by the fact that the majority of the claims were

not submitted to the Land Commission until the missionaries went out to the maka'ainana

and explained the process to them)4

No matter what the reason was for maka'ainana not filing a claim, three points are

apparent from this initial requirement of the Land Commission. First, the Mo'! and Ali'i,

who participated in the 1848 Mahele, received special privileges in identifying their vested

interest in the'aina. This point is evident from how their undivided interest was ascertained

and from the fact that their deadline to file claims was extended from February 14, 1848, to

1854, 1862, and finally to 1895)5 Second, over fifty percent of Kanaka Maoli were

identified as having no interest in the 'aina as they failed to submit claims by the February

14, 1848, deadline. Third, those maka' ainana who filed claims still did not have an

identifiable interest in the 'aina.

Kuleana Act of 1850

From February 14, 1848, to August 6, 1850, the Kingdom of Hawai'i had a dual

land system. The Mo'! and Ali'i, who had participated in the 1848 Mahele, could own land

while the maka'ainana still lived under the traditional land tenure system. To rectify this


32 Kuykendall, 293.

33 "To All Claimants of Land in the Hawaiian Islands," The Polynesian, 12 February 1848, 156.

34 Robert Stauffer, "Land Tenure in Kahana, Hawai'i, 1846-1920 (PhD. diss.: University of Hawai'i,1990),22.

35 Chinen, 21-2.

13

situation, Judge William Little Lee submitted four resolutions to the Privy Council which

would provide the maka'iiinana with fee simple title to their 'iiina.36 The Privy Council

accepted these resolutions on December 21, 1849. These resolutions then went to the

Legislature where they were debated for eight months and passed only after two further

provisions were added which benefitted the Ali'i. These last two resolutions stated that:

5. In granting to the people, their house lots in fee-simple, such as are separate anddistinct from their cultivated lands, the amount of land in each of said house lotsshall not exceed one quarter of an acre.6. In granting to the people their cultivated grounds, or kalo lands, they shall only beentitled to what they have really cultivated, and which lie in the form of cultivatedlands; and not such as the people may have cultivated in different spots, with theseeming intention of enlarging their lots; nor shall they be entitled to the wastelands)7

These provisions ensured that the maka'iiinana would receive the least amount of

land possible. This condition would benefit the Ali'i when selling or leasing their 'iiina.

Realizing the destitute state of the maka'iiinana, King Kamehameha III asked the Privy

Council to amend this Act since "a little bit of land, even with allodial title, if they [the

maka'iiinana] be cut off from all other privileges, would be of very little value...."38 This

provision secured the basic resources of the ahupua' a for the maka' iiinana and it was added

to the Kuleana Act before it was finally implemented on August 6, 1850.

The Continued Steps of Alienation

When the Kuleana Act was enacted, only the 14,195 maka' iiinana, who had

submitted their claims, were eligible to obtain fee simple title to their 'iiina. However, these

maka'iiinana still had to provide testimony to their claim and pay for a survey before they

could obtain private ownership of the land. These two steps further alienated 'iiina from

5,774 maka'iiinana as they failed to meet these requirements.

36 Maivan Lam, "The Kuleana Act Revisited: The Survival of Traditional Hawaiian Commoner Rightsin Land," Washington Law Review 64, no. 2 (April 1989): 261.

37 Territory of Hawai'i, Revised Laws ofHawaii, 1925, vol. 2 (Honolulu: Honolulu Star-Bulletin,1925),2142.

38 Hawai'i, State Archives, Privy Council Records, vol 3 B (Honolulu: n.p.), 713.

14

Several reasons exist as to why the maka'ainana failed to submit adequate testimony

to secure their claims. Some maka'ainana decided to relinquish their claims to the Ali'i of

the ahupua'a in hopes of maintaining some semblance of their society)9 In other areas,

Ali'i refused to grant claims because of personal grievances or prior arrangements with the

maka'ainana.4o Finally, several ofthe maka'ainana claimants did not provide testimonies

because they had died during the epidemics of 1848 and 1849.41

Before the maka'ainana, who successfully filed claims and provided adequate

testimony, could obtain their awards, the Land Commission required them to pay for a

survey of their claims. This expense ranged between six and twelve dollars.42 This price

was a hefty sum for the maka' ainana to pay for surveys that disrupted their society, alienated

their 'aina from them, and were completely useless in identifying the location of their

awards.

These last two effects of the surveys are the direct results of the Land Commission's

failure to provide the surveyors with guidelines on how to survey the claims.43 Curtis

Lyons, a surveyor on Hawai'i, illustrated this point as he gave an account of three surveyors

who were sent to Hawai'i with the instructions "to include what the claimant has cultivated

and improved."44 The first surveyor, a foreigner, did not take into account that the 'aina

39 Linda S. Parker, Native American Estate: The Struggle Over Indian and Hawaiian Lands (Honolulu:University of Hawai'i Press, 1989), Ill.

40 The Ali'i Nui or his konohiki had the authority to either accept a testimony or reject it. In someareas, the objection of the Ali'i Nui meant a maka'ainana did not receive his claim.

41 Robert C. Schmitt, Demographic Statistics ofHawaii: 1778-1965 (Honolulu: University of Hawai'iPress, 1968), 37. Epidemics of measles, influenza, whooping, cough, and diarrhea swept through theislands between 1848 and 1849 killing more than 10,000 Kanaka Maoli.

42 Curtis J. Lyons, "Land Matters in Hawaii - No.5," The Islander 1, no. 22 (1875): 135.

43 Alexander, 123.

44 Curtis J. Lyons. "Land Matters in Hawaii - No.5" The Islander 1, no. 23 (1875): 143.

15

needed to lay fallow for two to three years before another crop of kalo could be planted.

The result was that his surveys only included 'aina under cultivation, an amount of 'aina too

small on which the maka'ainana could survive so many of them abandoned their awards.

The second surveyor, a Kanaka Maoli, went to a location where the missionary in

the area believed the maka' ainana "had the main right to the land."45 This attitude resulted in

awards that were "fifteen to thirty and even forty acres in extent."46

The third surveyor was carefully watched during his surveys by the konohiki.

Before he turned in his surveys, however, he multiplied the 'aina under cultivation by the

number of seasons the 'aina lay fallow. His surveys resulted in the maka'ainana receiving

six to twelve acres per claim.

The last two surveyors seem to be the exception rather than the rule for the average

claim or Land Commission Award was only two to four acres.47 Many of the surveys were

performed by incompetent surveyors who did not realize or appreciate the significance of

their work and as such their surveys were negligently or fraudulently conducted.48 An even

greater injustice than the negligence and fraudulence demonstrated by these surveyors was

the total ineptness of all surveyors to fix the location of the award within the ahupua' a.

Royal Patents

Only 8,421 maka'ainana, or approximately thirty percent of the population, endured

the process of land privatization. Of these maka'ainana, only 7,932 went on to receive

45 Ibid., 143.

46 Ibid.

47 William Fremont Blackman, The Making ofHawaii: A Study ofSocial Evolution (New York: TheMacMillan Company, 1906), 158.

48 Lydgate, 105.For an alternative view of some surveyors see Riley Moffat and Gary L. Fitzpatrick, Surveying the

Miihele: Mapping the Miihele, vol. 2 Palapala'aina (Honolulu: Editions Limited, 1995),62.

16

Royal Patents which quitclaimed the government's interest in the land.49 For the 419

maka'iiinana who did not receive Royal Patents to their claims, the land Commission Award

furnished "as good and sufficient a ground upon which to maintain an action for trespass,

ejectment, and other real action, against any person or persons whatsoever, as if the

claimant, his heirs or assigns, had received a Royal Patent for the same...."50

The Foundation for Continued Alienation

Neither a Land Commission Award nor a Royal Patent protected the awardee from

the possibility of land alienation. As such, the Ali'i and maka' iiinana who were

unaccustomed and ill prepared for the demands and rigors of private land ownership were

easy prey for debts, adverse possession, and tax and mortgage foreclosures. The

maka' iiinana's susceptibility to these predators of private land ownership was enhanced by

two features of their Land Commission Awards, their size and their unfixed location.

Only 28,600 acres were awarded to the 8,421 maka'iiinana making the average size

of a Land Commission Award about 3.3 acres. Curtis Lyons stated, however, that one

surveyor averaged six to twelve acres per claim while another surveyor sent in claims as

large as forty acres. The existence of these larger claims means that several claims much

smaller than 3.3 acres were awarded. These smaller awards, as Lyons identified, were

insufficient for the maka'iiinana's needs and were subsequently abandoned.

The failure ofthe surveyors to fix the location of the awards within the ahupua' a was

furthered hampered by the fact that the surveyors used rocks, hedges, trees, and ditches as

markers for their surveys.51 Using these natural landmarks for boundaries initially

49 Andrew Lind, An Island Community: An Ecological Succession in Hawaii (New Yark: GreenwoodPress, 1968),47.

Chinen, 14.

50 Territory, Revised, 2146.

51 Lydgate, 107.

17

benefitted the maka'ainana for he knew exactly the extent of his award, but once a tree died

or the rock was moved, the boundary to the award was lost forever.

Summary


tenure system into one of private ownership. To make this transformation, the Land

Commission required each maka'ainana to submit a claim, provide testimony, and pay for a

survey in order to maintain his interest in his 'aina. Seventy percent of the Kanaka Maoli

had their' aina alienated from them as they failed to meet these requirements. Those

maka'ainana, who did receive awards, entered the system of private land ownership with

small and poorly surveyed awards.

18

CHAPTER 3THE 1846-1848 POPULATION OF LA'IE

Located in the Ko'olau Loa district of O'ahu, Ui'ie consists of the ahupua'a of

Ui'ie Wai and Ui'ie Malo'o (Figure 1).1

O'AHU La'!~ Wai

o

Figure 1. La'ie Wai and La'ie Malo'0 ahupua' a: La'ie, Ko'olau Loa, 0'ahu.

When Kanaka Maoli settled La'ie around A.D. 1000, they found "a broken area of

coastal dunes and level lands, with stretches of elevated coral to shoreward and inland,

intersected by many small branching streams between rough ridges that extend far down to

the sea."2 Kanaka Maoli used the relatively flat land between the branching streams and

rough ridges for wet land taro cultivation.3 This cultivation practice extended from mauka

(inland mountain area) to makai (ocean) in both La'ie Wai and La'ie Malo'o.

1Ui'ie means the "'ie leaf' while Ui'ie Wai means "wet Ui'ie" and Ui'ie Malo'o means "dry Ui'ie."Mary Kawena Pukui, Samuel H. Elbert, and Ester T. Mookini, Place Names ofHawaii rev. ed. (Honolulu:The University Press of Hawai'i, 1974), 127-128.

2 Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc., Archaeological Inventory Survey Laie Master Plan Project: Lands ofMalaekahana and Laie Koolauloa District Island ofOahu (Hilo, 1992), 8.

E. S. Craighill Handy and Elizabeth Green Handy, Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life, Lore, andEnvironment (Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press, 1972),461.

3 Joseph Kennedy, James Moore, and Laura Reintsema, An Archaeological Data Recovery Report forthe Proposed Kokololio Beach Park, Located at TMK: 5-5-1:54 Lii'iemalo'o Ahupua'a Ko'olauloa DistrictIsland of0 'ahu Revised December 1992 (Haleiwa, 1992),6-7.

19

Archaeological work suggests that the Koloa and Wailele streams in Ui'ie Malo'o were the

primary regions for taro growing "in prehistoric Hawaii," but Kanaka Maoli history states

that the most famous taro terraces such as "Naue-loli (Move-[and]-change), Kuamo'o

(Backbone), Mahanu (Rest-[and]-breathe), Makali'i (Pleiades), Po'o-haili (Head-recalls)"

and Ka-puna (The-spring) were located in Ui'ie Wai.4

The First Censuses of La'ie

The population once supported by the taro terraces of La' ie remains uncertain, but

Harvey H. Cluff, an L.D.S. missionary, stated in 1871 that "even within memory of

natives now living here (La'ie), some ten villages flourished upon this small district. ..."5

The first recorded populations of La'ie Malo'o and La'ie Wai were the missionary censuses

of 1831-1832 and 1835-1836. These censuses tabulated the populations of both ahupua' a

under the name of La'ie. Table 1, which compares these censuses, shows the dramatic

decline of La'ie's population a decade before the process of land privatization.

Table 1. The 1831-1832 and 1835-1836 Population of La'ie

Year Kane Wahine Keiki kane Kaikamahine La'ie Ko'olauLoa

1831-1832 180 159 56 57 452 2,891

1835-1836 157 105 64 49 375 2,681

% Change -12.8 -34.0 +14.3 -14.0 -17.0 -7.3

Source: Data from Robert C. Schmitt, The Missionary Censuses of Hawaii (Honolulu: Bernice P. BishopMuseum, 1973), 19,24.

The population of La'ie made up approximately 15.6% of the Ko'olau Loa's district

population in 1831, but dropped to 14% in 1835. This 1.6% drop on the district level

translated to a 17% loss in La'ie's total population and 24.5% loss in the female

4 Ibid., 6-7.Handy, 461.

5 Andrew Jenson, "History of the Hawaiian Mission of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,1861-1885." This manuscript is not paginated. The above quote can be found under 4 October 1871.

20

population.6 This large loss of females did not affect the number of land claims registered

in Ui'ie ten years later (1846-1848) as females could not claim 'aina, but the loss of so

many females may have contributed to the alienation of La'ie's claims in the 1850's.7

1846-1848 Populations: The Problem With Census Records

According to Marion Kelly, "approximately 70% of the adult male population, with

their wives and children were rendered landless" by 1850.8 This figure, although the most

accurate on Kanaka Maoli land alienation, is somewhat inflated since Kelly used the 1850

adult male population count and divided it by the total number of Land Commission

Awards granted by 1855. To eliminate this statistical inflation and identify the extent of

Kanaka Maoli land alienation caused by the process ofland privatization in La'ie, the

February 14, 1846, to February 14, 1848, population of La'ie must be ascertained. This

figure does not exist, however, as the three censuses taken between 1846-1849 were

incomplete and unreliable.9 The 1850 census, although more accurate than the previous

three censuses, only provided the population of each island while the 1853 and 1860

censuses presented data "for each of the twenty-four judicial districts," but failed to provide

population counts for specific ahupua' a. lO

6 Although geographical shifting, warfare, epidemics, and infanticide, which recorded a high between1832-1836, were causes of change in populations throughout Hawai'i, the exact reason for the dramaticdecrease in adult females in Ui'ie during this period could not be determined from the available information.Robert C. Schmitt, Demographic Statistics ofHawaii: 1778-1965 (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press,1968), 30, 37.

7 Several of the claims in Ui'ie were not granted because the claimant died without an heir (see page32). Therefore, the possibility exists that a few of the women who died between 1831-1836 were claimants'wives, daughters, or sisters who could have received their male relatives' Land Commission Awards.

8 Marion Kelly, "The Impact of Missionaries and Other Foreigners on Hawaiians and Their Culture,"in Hawai'i: Return to Nationhood, ed. Ulla Hasager and Jonathan Friedman (Haslev: Denmark: NordiskBogproduktion, 1991), 104.

9 Schmitt, 52.

10 Ibid., 53-54.

21

The only source providing data on the population ofUi'ie during this time period is

John Wesley Coulter's Population and Utilization of Land and Sea in Hawaii, 1853.1 1

Coulter's work shows the population of the Ui'ie/Malaekahana region to be about 350 in

1853. This number is unreliable, however, as he places the entire population of Ko'olau

Loa district at about 2,000 when the 1853 census has it 1,345. If scaled to the 1853

census's results, then Coulter's La'ie/Malaekahana population would be about 235. Even

if this number is correct, the question still remains as to how many of these 235 individuals

resided in La'ie.

Table 2 lists the infonnation from the 1831-1832, 1835-18366, 1850, 1853, and

1860 censuses for the populations of rural O'ahu, the Ko'olau Loa district, and La'ie. 12

Table 2. Census Data

Location 1831-1832 1834-1836 1850 1853 1860

RuralO'ahu 16,401 14,804 10,956 7,671 6,865

Ko'olau Loa 2,891 2,681 1,345 1,187

La'ie 452 375

Source: Data for 1831-1832 and 1835-1836 censuses is from Robert C. Schmitt, The Missionary Censusesof Hawaii (Honolulu: Bernice P. Bishop Museum, 1973), 19,24. Data for 1850, 1853, 1860 censuses isfrom Robert C. Schmitt, Demo~raphic Statistics of Hawaii: 1778-1965 (Honolulu: University of Hawai'iPress, 1968), 53.

Using the infonnation in Table 2, Table 3 shows an attempt to estimate the 1850

population of La'ie by using percentages based on the assumptions that:

1) The Ko'olau Loa population followed a similar decline as the rest of rural 0'ahu.

2) La'ie's population decreased 1.6% in relationship to Ko'olau Loa's population.

11 John Wesley Coulter, Population and Utilization ofLand and Sea in Hawaii, 1853 (Honolulu:Bernice P. Bishop Museum, 1931), 18.

12 Rural O'ahu includes all districts on O'ahu except, Honolulu. This standard of analysis was chosenbecause its demography is similar to Ko'olau Loa's.

22

Table 3. The 1846-1848 Estimated Population ofUi'ie

Location 1831-1832 1834-1836 1850 1853 1860

RuralO'ahu 16,401 14,804 10,956 7,671 6,865

Ko'olau Loa 2,891 2,681 1,984-1,923a 1,345 1,187

% of Rural O'ahu 17.62 18.11 18.11-17.53 17.53 17.29

Ui'ie 452 375 245-237 145 114

% of Ko'olau Loa 15.63 13.98 12.33 10.68 9.63

a Information in Italics is estimated.

Unless a drastic population swing took place in the Ko'olau Loa district between

1835-1850, the estimate for 1850 seems probable as the district maintained 17-18% of the

rural O'ahu population both before and after 1850. The 237-245 population estimated for

Ui'ie in 1850 remains highly questionable. Even if this estimate is relatively close to the

actual 1850 population, the effects of the "measles, whooping cough, diarrhea, and

influenza" epidemics of 1848-1849 are unknown on the population of Lii'ie.l 3 As such,

neither the 1846-1848 population for La'ie nor the number of Kanaka Maoli rendered

landless in La'ie by the process of land privatization can be determined from the censuses.

Those seeking to determine Kanaka Maoli land alienation within other ahupua' a of

Hawai'i by establishing their 1846-1848 population will encounter similar difficulties as the

survey "returns are not complete for anyone census and are available only for the years

1866, 1878, 1890, 1896."14 As such, an alternative source of data is needed to determine

1846-1848 populations. Since tax records do not exist for La'ie nor for other ahupua'a

before 1855 and the "collection of property taxes did not begin until 1859," the Land

13 Schmitt, 37.

14 Hawai'i, State Archives, "Census Collection: 1840-1896," vol. 2 Hawaii State ArchivesGovemment Records Inventories: Finding Aids for Hawaii Government Records on File in the Hawaii StateArchives (Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1991),2.

23

Commission records are the only other available source of information from which to

determine a 1846-1848 population.l5

Summary of Land Commission Records' Population Analysis

Appendix A contains an analysis which attempted to derive the 1846-1848

population of La'ie from the Land Commission records. 16 This analysis identified 145

individuals who either claimed or cultivated 'aina in La'ie between 1846-1848.l7 Of these

individuals, only sixty-five were positively identified as living within the borders ofLa'ie

while eleven were identified as living outside of La'ie and the residency of sixty-nine

remained unknown.

The results of this analysis make the estimates of La'ie's 1846-1848 population and

the number of individuals whose 'aina became alienated highly problematic for two

reasons. First, the residencies of sixtyy-nine individuals or 47.6% of those identified as

either claiming or cultivating 'aina in La'ie remain unidentified. This high percentage of

uncertainty prevents an accurate estimate of La' ie's 1846-1848 population from being

made. Even in ahupua'a where the Land Commission records yield a high percentage of

certainty for male claimants' residencies, the adult female and child populations must be

extrapolated before determining the degree of alienation within an ahupua'a's population.

The only way to derive these counts is to extrapolate them from the Hawaiian Kingdom's

1850 census ratios.l 8 Extrapolating an ahupua'a's population from Kingdom ratios yields

15 Hawai'i, State Archives, "Inventory of Records for the Department of Taxation," vol. II HawaiiState Archives Government Records Inventories (Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1994),8.

The only tax record existing in the Hawai'i State Archives before 1855 is the 1847 record forHamakua.

16 Appendix A begins on page 107.

17 This number must be considered a conservative figure as it is highly unlikely that the LandCommission records mention all the maka'ainana cultivating 'aina in La'ie between 1846-1848.

18 Schmitt, 43.

24

highly inaccurate results even when the ahupua'a's adult male population count is known.

Table 4 illustrates this point as it extrapolates the 1831-1832 populations of Ui'ie,

Punalu'u, and Waimea from their 1831-1832 adult male population and Ko'olau Loa's

female and child ratios for 1835-1836.19

Table 4. Derived Populations From 1835-1836 Ratios

Male Adults 1835-6 Females 1835-6 Children Population 1831-2

(Males x .852)a (Males x .684) Derived Actual Difference %

Ui'ie (180) 153 123 456 452 +.88

Punalu'u (145) 124 99 368 318 +15.7

Waimea (100) 85 68 253 217 +16.5

a Ratios based on females: lOO males and children: 100 males.-

~: Data generated from Robert C. Schmitt, The Missionary Censuses of Hawaii (Honolulu: Bernice P.Bishop Museum, 1973), 19,24.

Although the 1831-1832 derived population for Ui'ie was highly accurate, less than

one percent above the actual 1831-1832 population, using the same method to derive 1831

1832 populations for Punalu'u and Waimea yielded a +15.7% and +16.5% difference in

their respective 1831-1832 populations. This difference demonstrates the high amount of

variance inherent in using the Kingdom's ratios to determine an ahupua'a's population.

This variance prevents one from determining the number of Klinaka Maoli whose 'aina

became alienated by the process of land privatization within an ahupua'a since it does not

permit one to make an accurate estimate of an ahupua'a's 1846-1848 population.

The second finding of the Land Commission records analysis that makes deriving

the initial population alienation within La'ie highly problematic is the fact that eleven

maka'ainana, or ten percent of those who submitted claims to 'aina in La'ie,lived outside

19 Because the 1831-2 and 1835-6 censuses provided complete data for Ui'ie, they are used here todemonstrate that ahupua'a populations cannot be derived from the Kingdom population ratios. Althoughthe ratios used in this example are not Kingdom ratios, Ko'olau Loa's ratios validate this argument as theyare more closely related to the actual ahupua'a population than are the Kingdom's ratios.

25

of the ahupua'a. This finding demonstrates that many of the ahupua'a in the Ko'olau Loa

district of O'ahu were not closed units. In other words, the maka'ainana were not

restricted to the resources of the ahupua' a in which they lived. Consequently, the number

of Kanaka Maoli from whom the resources of an ahupua'a became alienated is not

dependant upon an ahupua' a's population, but rather upon the number of maka'ainana

utilizing the resources ofthat ahupua'a. This figure cannot be derived from any source

which prevents the number of Kanaka Maoli within an ahupua'a from being determined.

Summary

The 1848 Mahele and 1850 Kuleana Act of 1850 alienated the 'aina from

approximately 70% of the adult male population and their families by 1850. To what extent

each ahupua' a population fell victim to this alienation remains unknown as neither the

censuses nor tax records provide ahupua'a population counts between 1846-1848. In an

effort to overcome this deficiency, an analysis of the Land Commission's records was

undertaken to derive the February 14, 1846, to February 14,1848, population ofLa'ie.

The results of this analysis made an estimate of La'ie's 1846-1848 population highly

problematic as the residency of 47.6% of those cultivating 'aina in La'ie remained

unknown. Even in an ahupua'a where a high percentage of residency is known, this

chapter has shown that an 1846-1848 population cannot be extrapolated from the Land

Commission records as the population ratios between the Kingdom and the ahupua'a vary

too greatly to provide accurate population counts.

Finally, the results of the Land Commission records analysis revealed that many of

the ahupua'a in the Ko'olau Loa district ofO'ahu were not closed units. Consequently, the

degree of Kanaka Maoli alienation in La'ie cannot be based on the ahupua'a's population,

but rather on the number of maka'ainana that utilized its resources. Since this figure cannot

be derived, the number of Kanaka Maoli, whose 'aina in the ahupua'a of La' ie Wai and

La'ie Malo'o became alienated during the process of land privatization, cannot be

ascertained.

26

CHAPTER 4THE INITIAL ALIENATION OF 'AINA IN LA'IE, 1846-1853

The Land Commission required each maka'ainana to submit a claim, provide

testimony to that claim, and then make a survey of the claim before he could receive his

award. All or part of an individual's 'aina could become alienated from him during any

stage in this process. Table 5 shows at which stage in the process of land privatization the

maka' ainana of La' ie failed to secure full interest in their 'aina.

Table 5. Maka'ainana Losing Interest in 'Aina During Each Stage

Non-Claimants Claims Testimonies Unalienated Awards

Lost Interest 20 2 106 2

Note: These figures come from the Land Commission records analysis in Appendix A.

This breakdown shows that the maka'ainana of La'ie failed to secure their interest

in their 'aina by either not submitting claims or by not providing adequate testimonies for

those claims. This chapter, through analyzing the Land Commission records, seeks to

identify the reasons for these deficiencies.

Non-Claimants of La'ie

At least twenty individuals' in La'ie failed to submit their claims to the Land

Commission which resulted in their' aina being alienated from them on February 14,

1848.1 The exact reason why each individual did not file a claim remains unknown, but

three possible reasons were identified from the available sources on La'ie. First, the

maka'ainana of La'ie were confused by the changes brought about by land privatization.

Their confusion arose from not understanding why "they should take lands from the King"

when he had provided them with "all they needed in house lots, taro, and potato patches,

1 February 14, 1848, was the deadline set by the Land Commission for filing claims.

27

fish, other foods and material needs. . . ."2 Because of this confusion and their loyalty to

the King, Ui'ie's maka'ainana "did not hastily claim lands for themselves."3

When the maka'ainana of Ui'ie began to make claims, Keliiwaiwaiole, the konohiki

ofUi'ie, attempted to stop them by screaming "Leave the King's land alone!" as he pulled

pegs out of the ground that marked their claims.4 After much persuasion, Keliiwaiwaiole's

children convinced him to allow them and others to make claims in La'ie Wai and Ui'ie

Malo'o. Although he permitted others to make claims, Keliiwaiwaiole struggled over

whether he, himself, should submit a claim for he had previously declined to accept' aina

from the king.5 He finally did submit a claim on February 11, 1848, just three days before

the Land Commission's deadline.6

The final reason for the maka'ainana of La'ie not submitting claims arose from an

arrangement they made with Charles Kana'ina.7 The content of this agreement remains

unknown, but it led John Harbottle, agent for Kana'ina, to make specific objections to

2 David W. Cummings, "A History of Laie" (La'ie: Brigham Young University-Hawai'i Archives,n.d.), 2-3.

3 Ibid, 3.

4 Ibid., 2.Keliiwaiwaiole was also a former district judge. William Farrer, "Biographical Sketch: Hawaiian

Mission Report and Diary of William Farrer, 1821-1906" (Provo, Utah: Brigham Young UniversityLibrary, 1946),75.

5 Cy Bridges, in a discussion with the author, stated that Keliiwaiwaiole received his name "the chiefwith no property ('aina)" because he declined a land endowment from the King. Cy Bridges, conversationwith author, La'ie, Hawai'i, 19 December 1996.

6 Kingdom of Hawai'i, Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles, Native Register, vol. 4. (18461852; reprint, Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1964),355-356.

7 William Charles Lunalilo, at age 13, received both La'ie Wai and La'ie Malo'o during the 1848Mahele. His father and legal guardian, Charles Kana'ina, acted as konohiki over Lunalilo's 'aina during theprocess of land privatization. James K Ahloy, "A Royal Legacy: The William Charles Lunalil0 TrustEstate, Under Will" (paper presented to The Hawaiian Historical Society, 21 February 1991), 1.

28

several ofUi'ie's claims and a blanket objection to all ofthe Ui'ie claims.8 Although the

date of this agreement remains unknown, Kingdom records show Kana'ina took an active

part in limiting the amount of land acquired by maka'ainana not only in La'ie, but

throughout the Kingdom of Hawai'i.9 As such, both Kana'ina's social status and personal

participation in the land claim process might have deterred many of the maka'ainana of

La'ie from submitting claims if the agreement was made prior to February 14, 1848.

Overall, at least twenty maka' ainana failed to secure their interest in their' aina in

La'ie by not submitting claims. While no conclusive evidence exists that explains why

these maka'ainana did not submit claims, cultural values and confusion over the process of

land privatization appear to have been factors in their decisions.

Claimants of La'ie Re2isterin2 Only Claims

Only Hikiau and Palii registered claims to 'aina in La'ie and then failed to provide

witnesses to testify to their claims. No data exists on Hikiau's claim other than his

registration, but the Indices ofAwards cross references Palii's 3860 claim to a Palii 8580-B

claim. lO The Land Commission records circumstantially support this cross reference as a

Palii submitted both claims, both claims refer to 'aina in La'ie, and claim 3860 has only a

registration while claim 8580-B has both a testimony and an award but no registration. The

information found within the claim, testimony, and award, however, neither confirm nor

contradict this cross reference. Nevertheless, if the 8580-B testimony is compared with the

testimonies of other La'ie claimants, then claim 8580-B and claim 3860 do not appear to be

the same claim. To illustrate, the testimonies of those La'ie claimants, who submitted the

8 Kingdom of Hawai'i, Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles, Foreign Testimony, vol. 11(1846-1853; reprint, Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1964-1974),281.

9 Dorothy B. Barrere, comp., The King's Mahele: The Awardees and Their Lands (Honolulu: DorothyB. Barrere, 1994) 240.

10 Territory of Hawai'i, Office of the Commissioner of Public Lands, Indices ofAwards: Made By theBoard of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands (Honolulu: Star-Bulletin Press, 1929),1042.

29

same claim twice and received different numbers for each submission, show both claim

numbers in the testimony. The 8580-B testimony never mentions the 3860 claim and as

such appears to be different than claim 3860.

Non-Awarded Testimony Claimants of Ui'ie

Thirty-four maka'ainana both registered claims and provided testimonies to 'aina in

La'ie, but did not receive their awards. An analysis ofthese claimants' testimonies reveals

that only Kalimakuhi, Kekauanui, Keone and S. W. Kaaipuaa provided adequate testimony

to receive their Land Commission Awards, but no discemable reason exists for these

claimants not receiving their awards. For example, both Kalimakuhi's and Kekauanui's

claims were objected to by James Harbottle, agent of Charles Kana' ina. A note in

Kalimakuhi's testimony states, however, that Harbottle's objection did not affect his claim.

Although this objection may have affected the amount of 'aina obtained by Kekauanui, the

possibility that this objection is solely responsible for him not receiving his award is highly

unlikely as the same objection appeared in the testimonies ofthirty-four of La' ie's Land

Commission awardees.l 1 S. W. Kaaipuaa's testimony provides no insight into why he did

not obtain his award, but he might not have pursued it as he obtained Peka's claim.l2

Keone, the final claimant, died in 1850 and left his daughter Kapeahi as his heir. As late as

April 28, 1854, Kaneipu testified before the Land Commission that Kapeahi still

maintained the claim. Koula verified Kaneipu's testimony and added that no one objected

to this claim.l3 Despite these testimonies, Kapeahi still did not receive her father's claim.

As far as the remaining 30 non-awarded claimants, eleven distinct reasons were

identified in their testimonies for their failure to secure their Land Commission Awards.l4

11 Appendix H on page 120 lists the testimonies of awardees with this objection.

12 Hawaiian Kingdom, Foreign Testimony, 324.

13 Kingdom of Hawai' i, Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles, Buke Hoike, vol. 10 (18461853; reprint, Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1964-1974),357-358.

14 See Appendix C on page 115 for the location of these testimonies in the Foreign Testimony.

30

1. Before Dying They Gave Up Their Claim to Others (9)

Manuiki, Lalapa, Kauhi, Kuaio, Kawahinewiwi, Paki, and Kini (4327) all died in

1848, Kuahuia died in 1849, and Lakee died in 1850. Before each of them died, they

passed on their 'aina to relatives and friends who attended to it in various ways. For

example, Mahakea included Lakee's 'aina in his claim (3699), but gave up Manuiki's claim

because "the land [was] worth nothing."15 Kahoukua received Kuaio's 'aina and included

it in his claim (4333). Koula included in his claim his father Kini's 'aina and Kauhi's claim

went to several other relatives who included it their claims.

In contrast, Kawahinewiwi gave his' aina to his two children who deserted it some

time before 1850. Paki gave his 'aina to his heir, S. W. Kaaipuaa, who appeared before

the Land Commission and withdrew his claim to the 'aina. Kuahuia gave his 'aina to

Kamamai, who never cultivated it, so it reverted to the konohiki. In La1apa's testimony,

Paakahi swore Lalapa's "widow gave up the kalo land claimed to the Konohiki" and "the

kula land has not been cultivated since the death of Lalapa."16 In his testimony, however,

Kaonohi testified that he had "acquired the land of Lalapa."17 Although Kaonohi might

have acquired this 'aina after the death of Lalapa, it eventually reverted back to Charles

Kana'ina.

2. Claimed 'Aina of Other Maka'ainana (3)

Kaumeheniho, Lono, and Lauwalu all submitted claims that consisted of 'aina in

which they had no interest. For example, Kaumeheniho, who died in 1848, claimed 'aina

that he had tended for the konohiki while Lono submitted a claim which consisted of 'aina

given to him to cultivate while he was the school teacher in La'ie. The 'aina in

Kaumeheniho's claim reverted to Charles Kana'ina while the 'aina in Lono's claim reverted

to those who allowed him to cultivate it. Kauaiomano and Paakahi sent a letter to the Land

15 Kingdom of Hawai'i, Foreign Testimony, 251.

16 Ibid., 249.

17 Ibid., 294.

31

Commission and appeared in person to object to Lauwalu's claim because his claim

contained 'aina they had allowed him to cultivate. Lauwalu did not appear to refute this

objection, so the 'aina reverted to Kauaiomano and Paakahi.

3. Died Without Heirs (3)

Waawa, Hina, and Kaluahine all died without heirs. As such, their lands by law

reverted to the konohiki, Charles Kana'ina.l 8

4. Deserted The Claim (3)

Newa, Namamoku, and Puahi deserted their claims. No one knew where

Namamoku went, but Puahi went somewhere else on the island and Newa went to

California. The 'aina in both Newa's and Namamoku's claims reverted to Charles

Kana'ina while Puahi's 'aina reverted to Kana'ina and to other maka'ainana.

5. Failed to Cultivate 'Aina (3)

Namakaokaia, Puu, and Paukoa failed to cultivate their 'aina between 1848-1850 so

it reverted to Kana'ina.

6. Did Not Testify to 'Aina in La'ie (3)

Mokulama, Kuhema, and Keowaha registered claims to 'aina in La'ie. However,

none of their witnesses testified to their 'aina within La'ie so the 'aina reverted to Kana'ina.

7. Gave Up The 'Aina (2)

Palupalu and Kini (8439) both willingly gave up their La'ie 'aina. Palupalu, whose

'aina was included in Maii's claim (3714), gave up his 'aina because he was old and

infirm. Kini (8439) left La'ie in 1848 to live in Honolulu. Before Kini left, he gave his

'aina to the konohiki agent who gave it to someone else to cultivate, but the konohiki agent

reclaimed the 'aina for Charles Kana'ina.

8. Failed to Pay Taxes (2)

Kahiamoe and Kamaneo both failed to pay their annual taxes so the konohiki took

the' aina away from them.

18 Jon J. Chinen, The Great Mahe1e Hawaii's Land Division of 1848 (Honolulu: University of Hawai'iPress, 1956), 30.

32

9. Failed to Attend Poalima (I)

Kahawaii had his 'aina in La'ie taken away from him because he did not fulfill his

poalima obligations. 19

10. Overlapping Claims (1)

Ewa submitted a claim to his father Koi's 'aina because he did not know his father

had submitted one. Ewa withdrew his claim and Koi received the 'aina under L.c.A.

4272.

11. Repeated Claim (1)

S. W. Kaaipuaa submitted the same claim twice. Each submission received a

different Land Commission number (1115 & 8539), but the testimony provided in the

Foreign Testimony shows that they are the same claim.2o

Non-Awarded Claims Do Not Equal Alienation

This analysis of non-awardees' testimonies reveals why thirty maka'ainana of La'ie

failed to secure any portion of their Land Commission claims. The reasons, stated clearly

within the Land Commission records, leave very little doubt as to why these Land

Commission claims were not awarded. A more thorough analysis of these testimonies

reveals, however, that the failure of a maka'ainana to secure his Land Commission Award

did not unequivocally mean the 'aina within his claim became alienated from him. To

understand this argument, one must realize that a claim and the 'aina within that claim are

not one in the same. To illustrate, eleven of La'ie's claimants exercised their interest to

their claim by giving their' aina to other individuals, some of who included it in their

claims.21 Consequently, the Land Commission did not award the claim, but it did award

19 Poalima means the fifth day and refers to the maka'ainana's requirement to labor every fifth day forthe konohiki. Theodore Morgan, Hawaii: A Century ofEconomic Change, 1778-1876, vol 83 of HarvardEconomic Studies (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1948),24.


21 The 'aina of Lakee, Kuaio, Kini (4327), Kauhi, and Palupalu were included in awardees claims.

33

the 'aina to the individuals whom the original claimants had designated as their recipients.

Therefore, the 'aina never became alienated from the original claimants as they exercised

control over their 'aina by designating an heir.

Similarly, four of La'ie's maka'ainana claimed 'aina of other individuals. Since

they had no interest in the 'aina they claimed, it was not alienated when they did not receive

the Land Commission Awards. Likewise, when four of La'ie's maka'ainana died without

heirs and their' aina reverted to Charles Kana'ina, the konohiki, the' aina did not become

alienated as no one had interest in it except the konohiki, Kana'ina.22

Many non-awarded claims which initially appear to be alienated by land

privatization became alienated when the konohiki failed to adhere to the Kanaka Maoli

cultural practices relating to maIama 'aina.23 To illustrate, under cultural observance of

maIama 'aina the konohiki maintained the right to secure and redistribute' aina of those

maka'ainana who failed to malama it,24 In La'ie, 'aina from ten claims reverted to

Kana'ina, the konohiki, because of this reason.25 However, Kana'ina, instead of

redistributing the 'aina according to the cultural practice of malama 'aina, maintained the

'aina for himself so that he could acquire private ownership of it through the process of

land privatization.

Overall, the process of land privatization completely alienated 'aina from nine

claimants in La'ie. No specific reasons for this alienation exist for four of these claimants

while failure to pay taxes or failure to provide sufficient testimony alienated the remaining

22 Chinen, 30.

23 Malama 'aina means to take care of the land by properly cultivating her and making her "beautifulwith neat gardens and careful husbandry." LilikaIa Kame'eleihiwa, Native Land and Foreign Desires(Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press, 1992),25.

24 Ibid., 25-33.

25 These claimants were Waawa, Hina, Kaluahine, Newa, Namamoku, Puahi, Namakaokaia, Puu,Paukoa, and Kahawaii.

34

five claimants from their 'aina.26 Despite the fact only one-fourth of La'ie's non-awarded

claims were alienated, all of these claims appear in the Indices ofAwards as "Not

Awarded."27 Consequently, La'ie's not awarded claims, like others throughout Hawai'i,

have been overlooked as a valuable source for solving the mystery as to why so many

kuleana claims were not awarded.28

Problems With the Land Commission Awards

Despite seventy-two Kanaka Maoli eventually receiving Land Commission Awards

in La'ie, only W. C. LunaIilo and Kakau received all the La'ie 'aina they original claimed.

The extent and exact moment of alienation of the other seventy claimants remains unknown

as the amount of 'aina in each claim remains locked within its description or lost in the

discrepancies of its Land Commission records. Amaka's Land Commission claim and

testimony, which are typical of La'ie's claims and testimonies, demonstrate these points.

Claim:

No. 3773 Amaka Laie, January 4,1848To the Land Commissioners, Greetings: I, Amaka am a claimant of land at Laie inthe 'iIi of Kamapuna. There are five lo'i, and one kula, no kula houselot.Following are the boundaries: north, Land of Kaleo, east Puni' s land, westMoanauIi's land, south, the Land of Pupuka. Here are the scattered claims: In the'iIi of KumupaIi, three lo'i, no kula. In the 'iIi of Paakea, two kula, no lo'i. In the'iIi of Kahilale, nine kula, no lo'i. In the 'iIi of Aakakii four kula. In the 'iIi ofNahelehele one kula. Because these claims of mine are so very scattered it is notpractical to tell you their boundaries. My right of occupancy of these claims isfrom kupunas to the present reign of Kamehameha III. Amaka29

26 The process of land privatization alienated the 'aina from the following La'ie claimants Kalimakuhi,Kekauanui, Keone, and S. W. Kaaipuaa, Kahiamoe, Kamaneo, Moku1ama, Kuhema, and Keowaha.

27 Territory of Hawai'i, Indices, various pages.


29 Kingdom of Hawai'i, Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles, Buke Hoike, vol. 4 (18461853; reprint, Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1964-1974), 165.

35

Testimony:

No. 3773 Amaka Laie 21st Sept. 1850Maii, sworn says, he knows the land claimed by Aamaka in Laie. It

consist of 8 kalo patches, a piece of Kula land and a House Site. The 8 kalopatches fonn 4 pIeces. The first piece of 3 patches, is bounded on Hauula side byKuku's land,- Mauka, by Moanauli's land,- Waialua side by Maii's land,- Makaiby Pupuka's land.

The second piece, of 3 patches, is bounded on Hauula side by Ihupu' sland,- Mauka by Koula's land,- Waialua side by Keliiwaiwaiole's land,- Makai byKamaneo's land.

The third piece, of one ~atch, is bounded on Hauula side by theKonohiki,- Mauka by Hakailani s land,- Waialua side by Mahoe's land,- Makai byPuaokahala's land.

The fourth piece, of 1 patch, is bounded on Hauula side by Kauhane' sland,- Mauka by Kuku's land,- Waialua side by Kaleo's land,- Makai by theKonohiki.

The kula land is bounded on all sides by the Konohiki. It is planted inTobacco. Clt's House site is near the sea side. It is enclosed with a wooden fence.There is one house in it. Claimant derived the land from his father.Keliiwaiwaiole, Agent of the Konohiki, consented to this claim.30

In his claim, Amaka names the places of cultivation, states both the crop and

quantity of crop under cultivation, provides limited details on surrounding cultivators, and

shows evidence of interest in the' aina. Although his claim contains this infonnation,

Amaka, like most of La'ie's maka'ainana, omitted both the acreage under cultivation and

the number of 'apana or pieces under cultivation within a specific parcel of land. The

omission of acreage, a completely foreign idea to Kanaka Maoli, is understandably absent

from the claims. Nevertheless, its absence prevents one from ascertaining the amount of

'aina eventually alienated from the claimant. Whereas, the omission of the number of

'apana within a given parcel hinders one from detennining what became alienated during

the process of land privatization in spite of the fact that a claimant lists the number of 10'i

(taro) or kula (field). For example, Amaka's claim stated he had a total of eight lo'i under

cultivation, five in Kamapuna and three in Kumupali. His testimony also states that he has

eight lo'i under cultivation, but in four separate patches, none of which contain more than

three lo'i. As such, the distribution of lo'i in Amaka's testimony appears to contradict his

claim and raises the question as to whether witnesses actually testified to items contained

within the claims.


36

Finding the answer to this question becomes highly complicated as the claims give

the location of cultivation, but the testimonies only mention the names of individuals whose

land surrounds the cultivated 'apana. Therefore, determining if the 'aina mentioned in the

testimony exists within the original claim becomes impossible unless the claim also

mentions the surrounding 'apana. Even if other individuals are mentioned, this does not

ensure that the 'apana referred to in the testimony is the same one that is in the claim. To

illustrate, Amaka claimed five lo'i at Kamapuna with the boundaries compromising of

Kaleo's, Puni's, Moanauli's, and Pupuka's 'aina. In the testimony, however, only one of

Amaka's four patches of lo'i even mention Moanauli and Pupuka and none of them

mention Kaleo or Puni. As such, the question remains as to whether or not this particular

'apana is the one mentioned in the claim.

Besides the problem of location and numbers, La'ie's Land Commission records

contain discrepancies because of items being mentioned only in the claim or testimony, but

not both. These discrepancies exist because the witnesses either did not testify to items

within the claim or testified to items not found in the claim. Ihupuu's claim (3731)

demonstrates both types of discrepancies as he claimed fifteen 'iIi of sweet potato and three

lo'i, but his testimony did not mention sweet potatoes and it referred to "6 kalo patches."31

Reasons for Discrepancies

Four reasons were identified for the discrepancies between La'ie's claims and

testimonies. First, two and half years elapsed between the time the claims were submitted

and the time the testimonies were recorded. During this time, La'ie's maka'ainana

maintained their lifestyle which included changes both in crops and cultivation locations.

Since several of the testimonies mention 'aina which became fallow, one can logically

assume other' apana came under cultivation. These changes would alter the type, amount,

and location of crops under cultivation and make certain parts of the claim obsolete.

Therefore, a witnesses may have testified to the newly cultivated 'apana instead of one

31 Kingdom of Hawai'i, Native Register, 159.Kingdom of Hawai'i, Foreign Testimony, 247.

37

mentioned in the claim that now lay fallow. No testimonies mention whether this practice

occurred in Ui'ie, but the discrepancies between the claims and testimonies supports this

hypothesis, especially when a testimony mentions an item not found within the claim and

omits an item mentioned within the claim that was under cultivation.

Besides changes in 'aina cultivation, several of the non-awarded claimants passed

their 'aina onto awardees who included it in their claims. Since other maka'ainana

cultivated 'aina, but did not submit claims, the possibility exists that their 'aina was also

included in the awardees' claims at the time of the testimonies. If an awardee had received

and included 'aina from other maka'ainana at the time of the testimonies, then his testimony

would differ from his original claim.

The differences between Peka's claim, shown below, and his testimony suggest a

third possibility for the discrepancies in La'ie's testimonies, that of exaggerated claims.

No. 10822 Peka Laie Feb. 10, 1848To the Land Commissioners, Greetings: I, Peka, hereby state my claim at Laie,Island of Oahu: 1 taro lo'i, Kuaiokumu, 1 taro lo'i, Puhau, 1/210'i within the lo'isof Kumuhahau, 1 taro lo'i ,Keoneelihou, 1 pali wauke, and the coconut tree andsweet potato patches below it, the moo of Napili'pili, 1 kula patch, the watercourse, 1 mo 0 Hanaweuweu, 2 mo'o, HopunUl, 1 mo'o, Makalii, 4 mo'o,Kahikiea, 1 mo'o, Kaiwikole, 1 mo'o, Omao, the muliwai of Paeo, the Paeo pond,1 mala of 'awa, thualis of Kaukauulua, of Laniloa, of Laeapahu, the beach ofLaiemaloo, kahi e ukuihuki ia aina i wahi /Translator's note: too obscure totranslate, possibly legendary reference/, and /Island off Mokuooaia, 1 kula is in themountain area of Kahaumalo, 1 kula is just makai of the Government Road, 1sweet potato patch is at Keapuapu. Peka32

Peka's claim vastly differs from his testimony which only mentions eight pieces of 'aina

that contain five and half 10'i, one' auwai, and two kula pieces and does not even refer to

the Paeo pond, the island of Mokuooaia, the beach of La'ie Malo'0 and the paJi (cliff) of

Kaukauulua, Laniloa and Laeapahu. These differences between Peka's claim and

testimony question his legitimate interest in the' aina, especially since his witnesses failed to

testify to the majority of his claim.

Finally, the most extensive reason for the discrepancies between the claims and

testimonies is due to the inconsistencies between what the Land Commission allowed a

32 Kingdom of Hawai'i, Native Register, 602.

38

claimant to submit in a claim and what the Kuleana Act of 1850 stated a claimant could

obtain. The notice placed in The Polynesian by the Land Commission stated that "All

persons are required to file with the Board ... specifications of their claims to land, and to

adduce the evidence upon which they claim title to any land in the Hawaiian Islands...."33

This broad statement produced claims that included in many cases any item that the claimant

used within the ahupua'a. In Ui'ie, this included 'auwai (canal), ponds, fisheries, beaches,

islands, pali, trees, kalo, kula, and much more. According to the Land Commissions

guidelines for claims, the maka'ainana of La'ie could obtain these items in fee-simple if they

could "adduce evidence" proving their interest in the 'aina. With the passage of the Kuleana

Act, the maka'ainana of La'ie lost their interest to many of these items because:

In granting to the people their cultivated grounds, or kalo lands, they shall only beentItled to what they really have cultivated, and which lie in the form of cultivatedlands; and not such as the people may have cultivated in different spots, withseeming intention of enlarging their lots; nor shall they be entitled to waste lands.34

These specific regulations pinpointed the type of land, "cultivated, or kalo lands," a

claimant could obtain within his award. These new regulations of the Kuleana Act stood in

stark contrast to what the Land Commission encouraged claimants to submit in their claims.

As such, the differences between these criterion contributed to many of the discrepancies

between the La'ie claims and testimonies.

Discrepancies Between the Testimonies and Awards

Because the Kuleana Act of 1850 diminished the type of 'aina a claimant could

legally claim, the testimonies provide another perspective from which to analyze what and

how 'aina became alienated from Kanaka Maoli. A comparison between the testimonies

and awards shows that 'aina became alienated from thirty-seven of the maka'ainana of La'ie

33 "To All Claimants of Land in the Hawaiian Islands," The Polynesian 12 February 1848, 156.

34 Territory of Hawai'i, Hawaii Revised Laws, 1925. vol. 2 (Honolulu: Honolulu Star-Bulletin, 1925),2142.

39

during the last stage of land privatization.35 The reasons for this alienation fall into three

general categories: blanket objections, specific objections, and miscellaneous.

Blanket Objection

As previously mentioned, John Harbottle made a blanket objection to all the claims

in Ui'ie "on the ground of an arrangement said to have been made between Kana'ina and

the Makaainanas in regard to their lands."36 However, only thirty-four of Ui'ie's

testimonies mentioned this objection.37 In comparing these testimonies with their awards,

no differences were found between sixteen while ten of the awards only omitted

uncultivated 'aina. Overall, James Harbottle's objection appears not to have affected the

majority of the claims in which it was noted. Nevertheless, the final eight testimonies with

this objection contained a total of seven kula 'apana and four lo'i patches which were

cultivated, but did not appear in the awards.

Specific Claim Alienation

The konohiki agent made specific objections to the testimonies provided for the

claims of Eku, Kanehoa, Opala, Alaala, Kaonohi and Pia. The konohiki agent objected to

the uncultivated 'aina within Kanehoa's, Opala's, and Alaala's testimonies. The konohiki

agent also objected to Eku's claim because he had failed to pay his annual tax in 1848 and

the 'aina had already reverted to Charles Kana'ina. Kaonohi testified in his own behalf that

"the greater part of the land embraced in this claim, is now uncultivated as he has acquired

the land of Lalapa."38 Kaonohi did receive the cultivated part of his original claim. He did

not receive, however, any of Lalapa's 'aina because Mr. Robertson "was engage[d] with

35 See Appendix H on page 120 for a list of awardees whose 'aina mentioned in their testimoniesbecame alienated.


37 See Appendix H on page 120 for a list of awardees with this objection to their claims.


40

others" and could not take Mahakea's testimony which verified Kaonohi's claim to Lalapa's

'aina.39

Of all the claims in La'ie, Pia's claim provoked the greatest debate over who had

interest in the' aina. The' apana at the center of this debate was a kalo patch that contained

"the spring which supplies all the kalo land [in La'ie Wail with water."40 The konohiki

agent claimed both the spring and the kalo patch for Charles Kana'ina because

Kamaikahulipu, the former konohiki of La'ie, stated he had given this patch to Pia "to take

care of as an Under Luna" and that Kana'ina had removed Pia as Under Luna in 1847.41

Pulehu testified, however, that Kamaikahulipu had given the pond to Pia and that "Pia had

continuously attended prisoners' day for the konohiki and he had made his contributions in

taxes until his death [1848]."42 Pulehu further stated, "I have never known the opposition

to him. . .. Kaaulani, the wife of Pia has had the patch to the present. The taro from the

patch is for Kaaulani and the patch has always been cultivated."43 To this testimony,

Keliiwaiwaiole added that "I have seen Pia working in the pond to the present day, (until

his death.)" while Kanaikaua swore "Pia started to work with it ... in 1832, ... I have not

known of any objections to Pia during his occupation here ... Pia's wife does the

cultivation of the patch and yield there from is for her."44 Finally, Nakeu swore that "I

have known that this was Pia's Pond from 1838 to the present time. I had not known until

39 Ibid., 295.

40 Ibid., 259.

41 Ibid., 259.Kingdom of Hawai'i, Buke Hoike, vol. 10,60.

42 Kingdom of Hawai'i, Buke Hoike, vol. 10,60.

43 Ibid., 60.

44 Ibid., 60-61.

41

October 1850 [the time of the testimony] about the konohiki's opposition in 1838 and I do

not known the reason for the objection...."45 Despite these testimonies in favor of Pia,

both the spring and the kalo patch reverted to Charles Kana'ina leaving Pia's wife,

Kaaulani, with only a house lot.

Miscellaneous

Five awardees in Ui'ie did not receive uncultivated 'aina mentioned in their

testimonies. Since this 'aina was not specifically objected to as was Kanehoa's, Opala's,

and Alaala's claims, the 'aina must not have been awarded because the claimant either did

not want the 'aina or the stipulations made in the Kuleana Act prevented them from

obtaining it.

Ten more of La'ie's awardees did not receive cultivated 'aina which consisted of

fifteen and a half lo'i patches, seven kula 'apana, and three piihale (house lot). No

objections are noted in these claimants' testimonies nor do the testimonies provide any other

reasons for these omissions in their awards.

Special Note: Pahale Omissions

The fifth clause of the Kuleana Act stated that "In granting to the people, their

house lots in fee-simple, such as are separate and distinct from their cultivated lands, the

amount of land in each of said house lots shall not exceed one quarter of an acre. "46 This

statement guaranteed a claimant at least a house lot, pahale, either located on his cultivated

'aina or on a quarter acre 'apana. In La'ie, five claimants neither claimed nor testified to a

pahale 'apana.47 The awards given to these five claimants do not mention a pahale 'apana.

Although the absence of a pahale 'apana in the award does not mean the pahale did not exist

45 Ibid., 61.

46 Territory, Revised, 2142.

47 Those maka'ainana not claiming a pahale 'apana were Kalawaiaholona, Kauhane, Kuanonoehu, andPeka.

42

on cultivated 'iiina, the possibility does exist that five of Lii'ie's awardees never received the

'iiina upon which they actually lived.

Summary

This chapter primarily through analyzing the Land Commission records revealed

that the reason more of Lii'ie's maka'iiinana did not file claims stemmed from cultural

values and confusion over the process of land privatization. This analysis also identified

eleven distinct reasons for thirty of Lii'ie's claims not being awarded. A detailed study of

these reasons revealed that the failure of a claimant to secure his Land Commission Award

did not necessarily mean the 'iiina within his claim became alienated. As such, the process

of land privatization only alienated about a quarter of Lii'ie's non-awarded claims.

This chapter also ascertained that the majority of Lii'ie's Land Commission

awardees had a portion of their claims alienated. The extent of this alienation remains

locked within the claim descriptions and the discrepancies in the Land Commission records.

The main reasons for these discrepancies stem from the two and half year period between

the submission of the claims and the taking of the testimonies. During this time period not

only did crops and cultivated 'iiina change, but the Kuleana Act of 1850 changed the criteria

for what type of 'iiina could be awarded. Therefore, a comparison between the testimonies

and awards was undertaken to identify what 'iiina became alienated from a claimant during

the last stage of land privatization. This comparison revealed that three piihale, nineteen and

half patches of cultivated lo'i, and fourteen patches of cultivated kula became alienated from

nineteen Land Commission awardees. Finally, this chapter has demonstrated, through a

detailed analysis of the Land Commission records, that 'iiina was alienated from every

maka'iiinana living in Lii'ie between 1846 and 1853.

43

CHAPTER 5IDENTIFYING THE LAND COMMISSION AWARDS

AND 'APANA OF LA'IE

The Land Commission existed from 1846 to 1855 and granted 8,421 awards. It

granted the last of the Ui'ie Land Commission Awards on October 18,1854. To obtain

their awards, the maka'ainana of La'ie had to successfully meet the requirements of the

Land Commission which included paying for a survey of their claims. The cost of these

surveys ranged between five and eight dollars, a price which far "exceeded the value" of

the' aina within their awards. l These surveys, besides being overpriced, proved to be "one

of the biggest problems" ofland privatization as they failed to fix location of the' apana

within the ahupua'a.2 Consequently, each awardee received an award which described the

boundaries of his 'apana, but failed to locate the 'apana within the ahupua'a.

In 1930, Antoine Ivins, the La'ie Plantation manager, furnished the Taxation Maps

Bureau with copies of seventy different award maps which contained "206 separate pieces

ofland."3 The Taxation Maps Bureau used these maps to create the 1931 map of La'ie

which identified the location of 171 'apana belonging to 70 Land Commission Awards.4

In 1974, Terry Day, working for the Council of Hawaiian Organizations, claimed that "72

kuleana and their 222 apana" existed in La'ie and as such the 1931 map "failed to include

1 The Land Commission Awards of Ui' ie averaged about 1.2 acres and at the going rate would havebeen between worth 30 cents and $1.80 an acre. Theodore Morgan, Hawaii: A Century ofEconomic Change1778-1876, vol. 83 of Harvard Economic Studies (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1948),133.

2 Riley M. Moffat and Gary L. Fitzpatrick, Surveying the Mahe1e: Mapping the Hawaiian LandRevolution, vol. 2 of Pa1apa1a 'aina (Honolulu: Editions Limited, 1995),39.

3 Antoine R. Ivins, "Plantation History Filled With Interest Present Manager Learns," HonoluluAdvertiser, Sunday, 6 April 1830, 2nd ed. Hundredth Anniversary of the Organization of the Church ofJesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints section, 5. These maps most likely came from a 1863 record book inIvins' office which showed "seventy different claims to 206 separate pieces of land."

4 Territory of Hawai'i, Treasury Department, Taxation Maps Bureau, Map ofPortions ofLaieMa1aekahana, Koo1au1oa, Oahu, T. H., First Tax District (Honolulu: Taxation Maps Bureau, June 1931)

The Taxation Maps Bureau does not have these maps. Ronald Tsuji. Conversation with author,Honolulu, 11 April 1997.

44

sixty-two apana."5 Day also questioned the location of the 'apana in La'ie as she stated that

Mr. Lambert Valente of the Pacific Surveying & Field Data Company "discovered that

kuleana in Laie appear on the tax maps in areas far from their original surveyed

boundaries."6

The issues of location and missing 'apana raised by Day were an essential part of

her study which focussed "on the history of kuleana lands as a means of discovering the

facts concerning alienation of these native lands from the Hawaiian people."? The facts of

'aina alienation cannot be appropriately addressed, however, unless the number of Land

Commission Awards and 'apana within La'ie are known. The different figures suggested

by Day, Ivins, and the Taxation Maps Bureau's 1931 map demonstrate that this question

remains unanswered. Unfortunately, this question cannot be resolved by analyzing just

these three numbers since other sources provided alternative figures as shown in Table 6.

Table 6. Number of Land Commission Awards and 'Apana in La'ie

Year Source L.C.A. 'Apana Cited

1929 Indices of Awards 73 224 Land Commission Awards

1930 Ivins 70 206 1863 record book

1976 Day 72 222 Indices of Awards

1985 Geddes 72 222 Indices of Awards

1992 Kennedy, Moore, and Reintsema 160 Indices of Awards

1995 Maly and Rosendahl 65 Indices of Awards

Sources: Data from Territory of Hawai'i, Office of the Commissioner of Public Lands, Indices of AwardsMade by the Board of Commissioners to Ouiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands (Honolulu: Star-BulletinPress, 1929), 793-796.; Antoine R. Ivins, "Plantation History Filled With Interest Present Manager

5 Terry Day, "Kuleana Land Research A Case Study: Ahupuaa of Laie" (Alu Like, Honolulu, 1976,photocopy), 9, 12.

Each Land Commission Award consists of 'apana or parcels of land. These' apana are often referred toas kuleana (property).

6 Ibid., 12.

7 Ibid., 1.

45

Learns," Honolulu Advertiser, Sunday, 6 April 1830, 2nd ed. Hundredth Anniversary of the Organization ofthe Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints section, 5.; Terry Day, "Kuleana Land Research A CaseStudy: Ahupuaa of Laie" (Alu Like, Honolulu, 1976, photocopy), 9.; Sylvia M. Geddes, "Laie, A ChurchColony in Hawaii, Its Modem Aftermath" (Laie, 1985, photocopy), 28.; Joseph Kennedy, James Moore,and Laura Reintsema, An Archaeolo~ical Data Recove[)' Report for the Proposed Kokololio Beach ParkLocated at TMK: 5-5-1 :54 La 'iemalo'0 Ahupua' a. Koolauloa District Islands of Oahu. Revised December,.l222 (Haleiwa: Archaeological Consultants of Hawaii, Inc.), 6.; Kepa Maly and Paul H. Rosendahl,Cultural Assessment Study Laie Wastewater Reclamation Facility CLWRF) Project: Cultural Si~nificanceof "Nioi Heiau" and Other Sites Within its Immediate Adioinin~ Lands, vol 1 of Ethno~raphicStudy forAmended Supplemental EIS Laie Wastewater Reclamation Facility CLWRF) Land of Laie. KoolauloaDistrict. Island of Oahu (Hilo: Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D. Inc., 1995), 20.

All of the researchers in Table 6 cite the Indices ofA wards (Indices) as their source

for the number of Land Commission Awards and corresponding 'apana in La'ie.8

Although the Indices are a valuable resource in locating information found in the Land

Commission Awards, this chapter demonstrates that researchers have not understood their

contents and consequently have overstated the number of Land Commission Awards and

their 'apana in La'ie. To correct this error, this chapter analyzes the Land Commission

records, tax maps, and the Bureau of Conveyances' Libers to identify the number and

location of 'apana in La'ie.

Misreadinl: the Indices of A wards

When researchers have counted the number of Land Commission Award entries

and their corresponding 'apana in the Indices under La'ie and then stated that these figures

are the number of Land Commission Awards and 'apana in La'ie, they have misinterpreted

the data within the Indices. This misinterpretation arises from a belief that each entry

represents a different Land Commission Award. This interpretation is not correct as the

Indices do not list awards, but rather index them. Kaonohi's L.c.A. 4288 illustrates this

small, but significant difference. All of the entries in the Indices appear in the same format,

8 Territory of Hawai' i, Office of the Commissioner of Public Lands, Indices ofA wards Made by theBoard ofCommissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands (Honolulu: Star-Bulletin Press,1929).

Since the Indices consist of several indexes and the title is plural, this text refers to the book in pluralform for the purpose of grammatical clarity.

46

but Kaonohi's L.c.A. 4288 appears twice on page 794.9 Each of these entries refer to a

separate volume and page number and show a different amount of acreage for L.c.A.

4288. An inspection of these two awards reveals, however, that they are exactly the same

award. These two awards exist because Kaonohi had two surveys of L.c.A. 4288 done

and subsequently he was issued L.C.A. 4288 twice. The Indices have two entries for

L.c.A. 4288 because they have indexed the location of both awards within the Land

Commission records. Therefore, despite Kaonohi's L.c.A. 4288 appearing twice in the

Indices, there is actually only one award.

Researchers have compounded this error by assuming that the Indices index each

'apana under the ahupua'a in which it exists when the Indices actually index the award

under the ahupua'a from which the claimant sent the claim. Nawai's L.C.A. 9894,

Kapuaokahala's L.C.A. 4342, and Keliiwaiwaiole's L.c.A. 8580 awards illustrate this

point as they state their location as "Laie, Oahu, Koolauloa."l0 However, 'apana two of

both Nawai's and Kapuaokahala's awards state that they are located in Malaekahana while

Keliiwaiwaiole's award states that his 'apana eight is in Hau'ula. ll Kakau's L.c.A. 8355,

a Malaekahana award, further demonstrates this point as his 'apana three exists in La'ie.l2

Researchers often make one final error in using the Indices. They assume that the

Indices contain the correct number of 'apana for each Land Commission Award.

9 Appendix I on page 122 contains a photocopy of the Indices ofAwards for Ui'ie.

10 Appendix J on page 124 contains a copy of Nawai's L.c.A. 9894.

II Kingdom of Hawai' i, Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles, Mau Palapala Hooko, vol. 6(1846-1855; reprint, Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1964),361,373-374.

Kingdom of Hawai'i, Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles, Mau Palapala Hooko, vol. 7(1846-1855; reprint, Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1964),708-709.

12 Kingdom of Hawai'i, Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles, Mau Palapala Hooko, vol. 4(1846-1855; reprint, Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1964),680-681.

47

Waikupulani's L.c.A. 4300 demonstrates this is not the case as his award consists of only

three 'apana, even though the Indices show it having four. 13

Overall, the Indices contain valuable information for researching Land Commission

records. However, they cannot be used to cite the number of Land Commission Awards

and 'apana within an ahupua' a as this is not their function. A review of the Land

Commission records for La'ie has demonstrated this point as it identified that not more than

seventy-three Land Commission Awards consisting of 220 'apana exist within the

ahupua'a. To assume that all of these awards and 'apana exist within La'ie, however,

overlooks the possibility that hidden among the intricacies of the Land Commission records

is information which proves otherwise. Therefore, the Land Commission Awards will be

compared with the testimonies to determine if any of the seventy-three Land Commission

Awards and their 220 'apana exist outside of La'ie.

Verification of the La'ie Land Commission Awards and 'Apana

Appendix A completed a partial testimony and award analysis by attempting to

identify the location of pahale within the La'ie claims.l4 This analysis revealed that

Kakau's, Nawai's, Kekui's, Kuahuia's, and Kahuailua's pahale were located in

Malaekahana. Both Kakau's and Nawai's award state that their pahale were in

Malaekahana. Kekui' s award fails to mention the location of his pahale, but his testimony

states that he had "a House site, in Malaekahana" and A. F. Turner, in his field book,

wrote Malaekahana under Kekui's pahale 'apana. ls Based on this evidence, Kekui's

L.c.A. 4336.2 exists in Malaekahana.

Neither of Kuahuia' or Kahuailua' s awards state the location of their pahale.

Therefore, the only evidence of their location is in their respective claims and testimonies

13 Ibid., 678.

14 Appendix A begins on page 107.

15 Kingdom of Hawai'i, Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles, Foreign Testimony, vol. 11(1846-1853; reprint, Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1964-1974),308.

A. F. Turner, "A. F. Turner's Field Book No.4 Laie" (Honolulu: Survey Division, 1851), n.p.

48

which state that Kuahuia had "at Malaekahana ... a clump of hala landl one house lot" and

Kahuailua's "house is in Malaekahana."16 According to these documents, these 'apana

exist in Malaekahana.

The testimonies for Kii, Kamano, Kapule, Nawai and Kapuaokahala stated that

they had 'aina in other ahupua'a besides La'ie. For example, Kamano's testimony stated

he had kula and a fishpond in Kapaka. He received this 'aina under his La'ie L.C.A.

4331, but this 'apana appears in the Indices under Kapaka, not La'ie,17 Kapule's award

contained only one kula 'apana and his testimony stated that this kula was located "partly in

Malaekahana."18 This 'apana is counted as a La'ie 'apana as it also exists in La'ie. Both

Nawai' s testimony and claim refer to one kula in Malaekahana. 'Apana three of his award,

his only kula 'apana, appears in Malaekahana on map 1 of Land Court Application 1095

and therefore exists outside of La'ie,19

Before analyzing Kapuaokahala's L.C.A. 4342, a pattern discovered in A. F.

Turner's surveys must be mentioned. The awards of Nawai, Keliiwaiwaiole, Kamano,

and Kakau show that if Turner stated that an 'apana appeared in a different ahupua' a, then

that' apana was placed at the end of the award. Nawai' s award further shows that if more

than one 'apana existed in a different ahupua'a, then only the first 'apana mentioned the

other ahupua' a.

Ap. 1 1 Loi Kalo rna Laie ...Ap. 2 Pahale rna Malaekahana ...

16 Kingdom of Hawai'i, Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles, Native Register, vol. 4(February 1846-September 1848; reprint, Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1964),206-207.

Kingdom of Hawai'i, Foreign Testimony, 291.

17 Kingdom of Hawai'i, Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles, Mau Pa1apa1a Hooko, vol. 9(1846-1855; reprint, Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1964),368.

Territory of Hawai' i, Indices ofAwards, 791.


19 Territory of Hawai'i, Land Court, Land Court Territory ofHawai'i Map With Application 1095 Map1 (Honolulu: Land Court, 12 October 1937).

49

Ap. 3 Aina Kula ...20

Although 'apana three does not mention a location, the 'apana exists in Malaekahana and

Turner identifies this fact by placing it under 'apana two instead of 'apana one.

Kapuaokahala's L.C.A. 4342 appears to follow this same pattern as the only kula

mentioned in his testimony was in Malaekahana.

Ap. 1 Pahale ona Laie ...Ap. 2 Aina Kula ona Malaekahana ...Ap. 3 Aina Kula .. ,21

Based upon this pattern and Kapuaokahala's testimony, L.C.A. 4342.3 belongs in

Malaekahana.

Overall, the comparison between the testimonies and awards of La'ie revealed that

five more 'apana and one Land Commission Award exist outside of La'ie. This finding

drops the number of La'ie Land Commission Awards to seventy-two and the number of

'apana to 215.

The Trouble With Ivins' Numbers

The comparison of the Land Commission Awards and testimonies identified that

not more than seventy-two Land Commission Awards and their 215 'apana exist in La'ie.

Antoine Ivins' 1863 record book challenges the accuracy of these numbers as it states that

only "seventy different claims to 206 pieces of land" existed in La'ie.22 Ivins' figures

demand attention as his record book was less than ten years removed from the last Land

Commission Award granted in La'ie. Unfortunately, the location ofIvins' record book

remains unknown and it cannot be consulted to determine which 'apana and awards were

20 Kingdom of Hawai'i, Mau PalapaJa Hooko, vol. 6, 361.

21 Ibid., 373-4.

22 Ivins, 5.

50

numbered among its figures. 23 However, Ivins' in a newspaper article stated that the 206

pieces of 'aina consisted of 83.187 acres of land.24 As such, the book's figures do not

include Lunalilo's L.C.A. 8559-B and its two 'apana which are comprised of over 6,000

acres of land. Taking this fact into consideration, this text and Ivins' record book only

differ by one Land Commission Award and six 'apana.

Although the location of Ivins' record book remains unknown, the Taxation Maps

Bureau's 1931 map was produced from the award maps supplied by Ivins. This 1931 map

shows the location of about eighty percent of the 'apana in question. In addition, Day

stated that another twenty-seven 'apana omitted from the 1931 map "have been added back

to succeeding maps."25 Therefore, an analysis of these maps should not only verify

whether the majority of the 213 'apana exist in La'ie, but also identify their locations within

the ahupua'a.

Results of The 1931 La'ie Tax Maps Analysis

Appendix K contains a comparative analysis of the 1931 tax map and subsequent

tax maps.26 Identifying the location ofthe 'apana in La'ie was impossible because neither

A. F. Turner's survey book nor La'ie's Land Commission Awards contained a starting

point to fix the location of the'apana within the ahupua'a. Therefore, this analysis checked

the relative position of adjoining 'apana in the 1931 map and subsequent maps to determine

if they corresponded to the original awards.

23 A thorough search ofthe records at Brigham Young University-Hawai'i, Hawai'i ReservesIncorporated, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' library and archives did not locate Ivins'record book.

24 Ivins, 5.

25 Day, 12.

26 Appendix K begins on page 125.

51

The 1931 map and subsequent maps contained 183 'apana and this analysis

identified another thirteen previously unlocated 'apana.27 Of these 196 'apana, the Land

Commission Awards and A. F. Turner's field book verified the relative position of 161

'apana. The review of the Land Commission Awards also identified that Keliiwaiwaiole's

L.C.A. 8580.1 and L.c.A. 8580.5 are the same 'apana.28 As such, the highest possible

number of 'apana in La'ie dropped from 213 to 212. Notwithstanding this success, sixteen

'apana were not located on any map, leaving the exact number of 'apana in La'ie unknown.

One Final Attempt

In a final attempt to locate these sixteen unlocated 'apana, the Land Commission

testimonies and the Libers at the Bureau of Conveyances were analyzed. Table 16 shows

that ten of the unlocated 'apana exist within the borders of La'ie according to their

testimonies.

Table 7. The Unlocated 'Apana of La'ie

L.C.A. # Acreage Location Source Type

3729.1 0.25 Makai Testimony Pahale4269.2 0.25 Makai Testimony Pahale4281.2 0.3 La'ie Testimony 810'i4290.2 0.67 La'ie Testimony 2 lo'i and 1 kula4290.3 0.25 La'ie Testimony Pahale4290.4 0.26 La'ie Testimony Kula4291.2 0.59 La'ie/MaIaekhana Testimony Kula4293.2 0.54 La'ie Testimony Kula4293.3 0.2 La'ie Testimony Pahale4300.2 0.45 La'ie Testimony Kula4300.3 0.25 Makai Testimony Pahale4334.4 0.25 La'ie Testimony Pahale4336.3 0.57 La'ie Testimony Kula4345.2 0.25 La'ie Testimony Pahale4451.4 0.25 near the river Testimony Pahale4514.3 0.2 Testimony Kula

27 Appendix N on page 157 shows the location of these previously unlocated 'apana.

28 See page 142.

52

A total of 206 'apana is obtained if these ten' apana are added to the 196 'apana located on

the maps. This number corresponds to Ivins' record book. Moreover, if the remaining six

'apana in Table 7 exist outside of La'ie, then the number of Land Commission Awards also

corresponds to Ivins' record book as Eku's L.c.A. 3729 would not be La'ie. However,

the 206 'apana only total 82.60575 acres which is .58125 acres less than Ivins' record

book. This difference, though small, still remains significantly large enough to prove that

the 206 'apana identified in this study are not the same as Ivins' 206 'apana.

This study does not attempt to ascertain which 206 of the 212 'apana total 83.187

acres. The reason for not attempting this search stems from the fact that several of the

'apana contain the same amount of acreage, such as the quarter acre pahale 'apana. The

exclusion of anyone of these quarter acre 'apana from the set of 206, therefore, would

result in a myriad of possibilities since the exact quarter acre 'apana excluded from the set

of 206 would be unknown. This search was also not attempted because discrepancies

existed between the awards, the Royal Patents, and the Indices as to the amount of acreage

comprising each 'apana,29 These discrepancies would not only increase the number of

searches that must be conducted in order to find the correct 206 'apana, but also suggest the

possibility that Ivins' record book might contain different acreages for the 'apana.

The Libers at the Bureau of Conveyances were checked in one final attempt to

identify the location of the unlocated 'apana.30 Although the Libers show conveyances for

each of the unlocated 'apana, the Libers do not state the location of these 'apana except for

referring to the Land Commission Awards. For example, J. Kupau on March 10, 1886,

deeded to Mahinaeleele "Palapala Sila Nui Helu 919 Kuleana Helu 4514" (Royal Patent

number 919 kuleana number 4514).31 This manner of conveyance appeared in the majority

29 Appendix 0 on page 158 shows a comparison of these numbers.

30 Libers are books which contain instruments of conveyances such as deeds, leases, mortgages,mortgage foreclosures, etc.

31 Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "1. Kupau to Mahinaeleele, Deed," Liber 98 (30 July 1886): 315316.

53

of the deeds, but in a few cases, such as Ihupuu's deed to P. F. Manini on July 3, 1862,

the actual Land Commission Award survey measurements were mentioned.32

When the deeds do mention the location of 'apana, they usually only cite the

location at the top of the Land Commission Award. This practice, in some instances,

provides incorrect information on the location of the 'apana within the deed. For instance,

Kapu D. Malo conveyed to Joseph F. Smith, Trustee in Trust, for the Church of Jesus

Christ of Latter-Day Saints:

All of that parcel of land situated at Laiewai, District of Koolauloa, described inLand Commission Award No. 9894 to Nawai, containing an area of 45/100 acre,the same have been conveyed to me by deed of Kaloana (w) and Kawaipua (k) herhusband, recorded in Liber 136 page 137.33

This deed conveys .45 acres and states that all of it is situated at La'ie Wai. Nawai's award

does contain .45 acres, but two 'apana consisting of .35 acres exist in Malaekahana not

La'ie Wai. As such, this deed incorrectly identifies the location of two 'apana.

A conveyance of Kapuaokahala's L.c.A. 4342 from Kaui to Mahakea, provides

another example of deeds providing incorrect locations.34 In this deed, the Land

Commission survey measurements are mentioned exactly as they appear in the Land

Commission Award, with one exception. The name Malaekahana has been dropped from

the measurements of 'apana two. As such, the entire award appears to be located in La'ie

when the last two 'apana actually exist in Malaekahana.

Identifying the location of the last sixteen 'apana from the Libers at the Bureau of

Conveyances remains highly unlikely, if not impossible, since the conveyances provide

minimal information on the locations of the 'apana. When these records do provide the

location of an 'apana, they cite the location mentioned in the Land Commission Awards. In

some cases, these citations contain omissions and consequently give the wrong location for

32 Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "Ihupuu to P. F. Manini, Deed," Liber 15 (3 July 1862): 277-278.

33 Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "Kapu D. Malo (Widow) to Tr. Of Church of Jesus Christ ofLatter-Day Saints, Deed," Liber442 (16 January 1916): 278-280.

34 Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "Kaui to Mahakea, Deed" Liber 24 (10 March 1867): 371-372.

54

an 'apana. As such, the Bureau of Conveyances' Libers failed to provide any new

infonnation on the sixteen unlocated 'apana.

Summary

The Land Commission required a claimant to pay for a survey of his claim as the

final step in obtaining a Land Commission Award. These surveys proved to be one of the

biggest problems ofland privatization as they failed to fix the location of the 'apana within

the ahupua'a. La'ie's surveys done by A. F. Turner were no exception to this practice.

Turner did indicate, however, in many of his surveys if an 'apana existed in another

ahupua'a. The Indices omit this infonnation as they index the 'apana under the ahupua'a

from which the claimant sent the claim. Consequently, several researchers, who cite the

Indices have claimed that seventy-three Land Commission Awards and consisting of 224

'apana exist within La'ie,35 A review ofthe Land Commission Awards finds that no more

than 220 'apana exist in La'ie. In an attempt to verify that these 220 'apana exist in La'ie,

this chapter compared the Land Commission Awards with their testimonies. This

comparison identified that five more' apana and one Land Commission Award exist outside

of La'ie.

The 1931 tax map and subsequent tax maps were analyzed to verify that these 213

'apana exist in La'ie. This analysis located 183 'apana on the tax maps and found thirteen

previously unlocated 'apana. Of these 196 'apana, the Land Commission Awards and A.

F. Turner's field book verified the relative position of 161 'apana. This analysis further

identified that Keliiwaiwaiole's L.c.A. 8580.1 and L.c.A. 8580.5 are the same 'apana and

as such, the highest possible number of 'apana in La'ie dropped to 212.

Despite the success of this analysis, sixteen 'apana remained unlocated. In an

attempt to locate these 'apana, this chapter analyzed their testimonies. The testimonies

revealed that ten of these sixteen 'apana exist somewhere in La' ie. A total of 206 'apana

was obtained by adding these ten 'apana to the 196 'apana located in the maps. This figure

corresponds with Antoine Ivins' 1863 book, but the acreage for these 206 'apana added up

35 These figures do not count Lunalilo's L.CA. 8559-B.

55

to only 82.60575 acres which is .58125 acres short ofIvins' acreage. This difference,

although small, remains significantly large enough to prove that the 206 'apana identified as

being in La'ie identified are not the same as Ivins' 206 'apana.

In spite of this fact, this chapter has demonstrated that not more than seventy-one

Land Commission Awards and 212 of their 'apana exist in La'ie and Antoine Ivins' 1863

record book confirms that not less than seventy Land Commission Awards and their 206

'apana exist in La'ie.36 These two sources also identify that at least 83.187 acres, but not

more than 84.39575 acres were awarded to the maka'ainana of La'ie.37

36 These figures exclude W. C. Lunalilo's L.C.A. 8559-B 'apana 35 and 36.

37 Appendix P on page 159 shows the acreage for each 'apana in La'ie.

56

CHAPTER 6CONCLUSIONS TO PART I

Part I of this study has reviewed the process of land privatization and analyzed its

initial effects on the Kfulaka Maoli of Ui'ie Wai and Ui'ie Malo'o. In doing so, this

analysis has moved from studying the initial stages of Kanaka Maoli land alienation at the

macroscopic level to the keystone of the Kanaka Maoli land tenure system, the ahupua'a.

Analyzing the degree of alienation from this perspective has demonstrated that Kanaka

Maoli land alienation within an ahupua'a cannot be described in terms of population as the

government censuses do not exist for any ahupua' a before 1866. This new perspective of

analysis has also revealed that many ofthe ahupua' a on the Windward side of O'ahu were

not closed units. As such, the number of Kanaka Maoli whose' aina became alienated

within an ahupua'a cannot be based on the population of the ahupua'a, but rather must be

derived from the number of maka' ainana utilizing its resources. This figure cannot be

derived from any source, thus preventing the number of Kanaka Maoli whose' aina became

alienated within an ahupua'a from being determined.

Since the degree of Kanaka Maoli land alienation within an ahupua'a cannot be

described in terms of population, this thesis analyzed Kanaka Maoli land alienation by

ascertaining the reasons why the maka'ainana of La'ie either did not submit claims or failed

to secure the claims they submitted. Analyzing Kanaka Maoli land alienation from this

point of view revealed several new insights into the reasons why the maka'ainana of La'ie

either did not submit claims or failed to secure the claims they submitted. A detailed study

ofthese reasons revealed, however, that a maka'ainana's failure to secure his claim did not

unequivocally mean that his 'aina became alienated. Moreover, this analysis found that

several of the non-awarded claims in La'ie were not alienated by the process of land

privatization, but rather by the konohiki failing to redistribute the 'aina according to the

cultural practice of malama 'aina. Consequently, only about a quarter of La'ie's non

awarded claims became alienated by the process of land privatization.

After analyzing the reasons why Kanaka Maoli land alienation occurred within

La'ie, this study attempted to identify the number and location of Land Commission

57

Awards and their corresponding 'apana within the ahupua'a. This analysis began with an

examination of the Indices ofA wards which showed that they cannot be used to cite the

number of Land Commission Awards and 'apana within an ahupua' a because they do not

contain this type of information. Consequently, the Land Commission records must be

analyzed in order to obtain these figures. In analyzing the Land Commission records, not

more than seventy-one Land Commission Awards and 212 'apana comprising 84.39575

acres were identified as existing within La'ie. 1 Locating these 'apana within La'ie proved

to be impossible as the Land Commission surveys failed to fix the location of the' apana

within the ahupua'a. Nevertheless, the Land Commission Awards and A. F. Turner's field

book were used to check if each of the 183 'apana on the tax maps of La' ie were in the

correct position in relation to the surrounding 'apana. This check verified the relative

position of 161 'apana and identified thirteen previously unlocated 'apana. Of the

remaining forty-one 'apana, twenty-five were surrounded by the konohiki's 'aina on the

tax maps, and sixteen 'apana remained unlocated.

According to the 1840 Constitution, the MO'l, Ali'i, and maka'ainana all held

undivided interest in the'aina. The purpose of the 1848 Mahele was to identify and

separate this interest. The Mahele did not achieve this goal as the maka' ainana were

required to identify their interest in the 'aina by filing a claim, providing testimony to the

claim, and finally paying for a survey of the claim. This process, with each succeeding

requirement, alienated the 'aina from an increased number of maka'ainana. Part I of this

study has analyzed this process within the ahupua'a of La'ie Wai and La'ie Malo'o. In

doing so, the findings of this study have demonstrated the need to look at the ahupua' a as

the basic unit of analysis in order to gain a deeper and better understanding of Kanaka

Maoli land alienation throughout the Kingdom of Hawai'i.

1These figures do not include W. C. Lunalilo's L.C.A. 8559-B 'apana 35 and 36.

58

PART II

CHAPTER 7THE 'AINA OF LA'IE AND ITS LEGACY


tenure system into one of private ownership by requiring each maka'ainana to secure his

interest in the' aina by submitting a claim, providing testimony to it, and then paying for a

survey of the claim. Only 8,421 maka'ainana fulfilled these requirements and received

Land Commission Awards. These awards were not only small and poorly marked, but

they failed to contain a non-alienation clause. l The omission of this clause from the Land

Commission Awards unleashed the furies of a foreign economic and legal system of

property taxes, mortgages, and adverse possession on the unprotected awardees.2 By

1936, the omission of this non-alienation clause had left only 6.6% of all Land

Commission Awards on the island of O'ahu in the possession of Kanaka Maoli.3

Notwithstanding this fact, Terry Day found that in 1976 approximately 24% of the La'ie

'apana remained in the possession of Kanaka Maoli.4 According to Day's research this

number might have been as high as 45% since Zions Securities Corporation (Zions) did not

have "recorded deeds" for approximately forty 'apana in its possession.

1 Ralph S. Kuykendall, The Hawaiian Kingdom 1778-1854: Foundation and Transformation(Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1938),293.

2 Marion Kelly, "Professor Justifies Native Anger," Ka Leo 0 Hawai'i, 17 January 1992, 10.Maivan Lam, "The Imposition of Anglo-American Land Tenure on Hawaiians," Journal ofLegal

Pluralism and Unofficial Law 23 (1984): 115.Melody Kapilialoha MacKenzie, "Historical Background," in Native Hawaiian Rights Handbook, ed.

Melody Kapilialoha MacKenzie (Honolulu: Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation: Office of Hawaiian Affairs,1991), 9.

3 Andrew Lind, An Island Community: An Ecological Succession in Hawaii (New York: GreenwoodPress, 1968),49.

4 Terry Day, "Kuleana Land Research A Case Study: Ahupuaa of Laie" (Alu Like, Honolulu, 1976,photocopy), 9.

This figure drops to 23% after adjustments are made for the eleven 'apana Day counted as being inLa'ie, but do not exist in the ahupua'a.

60

Zions' possession of these' apana has fostered the legacy that Zions Securities

Corporation and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints take what they want

without regard for the Kanaka Maoli. The origin of this legacy arises from "the old La'ie

sugar plantation" which Dr. Terry Webb called "a dependant colony of the church" and

Lorrin A. Thurston described as "a practical, business organization."5 The Church, unlike

Zions, has been branded with a second legacy for according to Thurston:

I first practically knew the Mormons as a colonizing organization at Laie....gathenng the natives together in a separate colony. Gradually the colony increasedIn numbers and I came to know it as being a quiet, and industrious settlement,where habits of industry and thrift appeared inculcated.6

Kathleen Mellen in the Paradise ofthe Pacific adds that "instead of attempting to uproot all

vestiges of the native culture the church, by sympathetic means, has been able to produce a

living faith" by leaving "the Hawaiian with his individual and racial pride intact, his self

respect unimpaired."7 The industrial and cultural success of the L.D.S. Church in the

development of La'ie was used as the main argument in favor of the Hawaiian rehabilitation

bill which created the Hawaiian Homes Commission in 1921.8

Notwithstanding this legacy of success, the L.D.S. Church, through the operation

of the La'ie Plantation, acquired interest in 126 'apana in La'ie between 1865-1925.9

5 Terry Webb, "Profit and Prophecy: The Polynesian Cultural Center and Ui'ie's RecurrentColonialism," The Hawaiian Journal ofHistory 27 (1993): 131.

Lorrin A. Thurston, "The Mormon Mission In Hawaii," The Honolulu Advertiser, Sunday, 6 April1930, Editorial section.

6 Thurston, Editorial section.

7 Kathleen Dickenson Mellen, "By their fruits ..." Paradise in the Pacific," 62, no. 8 (August 1950),3.

8 Riley H. Allen, "Where and How? "Rehabilitation" Succeeds," Honolulu Star Bulletin, Saturday, 10September 1921, Society Section, 1.

9 Interest used in this thesis denotes "a right, claim, title, or legal share" in land, but not completeownership of the land. Henry Campbell Black, Black's Law Dictionary, 5th ed. (St. Paul, Minn.: WestPublishing, 1979), 729.

61

Stories have proliferated over the years as to how the Ui'ie Plantation acquired these

'apana. For example, Sylvia Geddes claims that the plantation managers, who were also

the mission presidents, moved Kanaka Maoli off their kuleana for the purpose of increasing

the sugar cane cultivation while Terry Day claims that the Church "granted mortgages to

kuleana owners that led to foreclosures" and eventually Church ownership of the

kuleana. lO Finally, Dawn Wasson, the President of Hui Malama 'Aina '0 Laie, claims on

one hand that the Church and Zions have obtained interest in several 'apana through

adverse possession and on the other that many of the kuleana owners "have given their

lands to the Church and have done it with their whole heart."11

Little more than conjecture has been submitted as evidence either for or against the

methods used by the Church and Zions in their acquisition of 'apana in La'ie. Part II of

this thesis attempts to ground this conjecture by analyzing the history of La'ie from 1850 to

1930 and documenting the transference of these 'apana from Kanaka Maoli to the Church

of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and finally to Zions Securities Corporation. Ideally, a

study of this nature would include a title history of all of the 'apana in La'ie. Terry Day

completed such a document in 1976 and Dawn Wasson has one spanning from 1845 to

Several deeds to the Church contain phrases to the affect that I, the seller "give, grant bargain, sell and(continued) convey unto the said Joseph F. Smith, Trustee in Trust aforesaid, his successors and assignsforever. All my right, title and interest in" L.C.A. # located at Ui'ie. This phrase makes it highly difficultto determine whether the whole award or just certain 'apana were conveyed to the Church. The deed historyin Appendix Q shows that Kanaka Maoli definitely deeded interest in 99 'apana to the Church, and thepossibility exists that this number could be as high as 126 when the phrase above is taken intoconsideration.

10 Sylvia H. Geddes, "Laie, A Church Colony in Hawaii, Its Modern Aftermath" (La'ie, 1985,photocopy), 5.

Day, 8.

11 Dawn Wasson to Don W. Kleinman, Ui'ie, 29 April 1990.Ken Baldridge, "Tour of Historic Laie," in The Mormon Pacific Historical Society Proceedings,

Seventh Annual Conference. (La'ie: Brigham Young University-Hawai'i, 1986),7.

62

1917 done by a Mr. Kapuki.l 2 Day's document could not be located and Wasson would

not make her copy available for this study.13 Neither of these documents contain a

complete title history of La' ie's' apana, however, for according to Day "a number of deeds

do not appear in the Bureau of Conveyances indexes, which, ... leaves large gaps in some

kuleana histories."14 In addition, the attorneys for Alexander and Baldwin have stated that

"The matter of title succession has often to be determined from such facts as actuality and

duration of possession of the land, family declarations as to pedigree, marriages, order of

deaths, etc" and that deeds are used "to fill in the gaps."15

The scope of this study does not allow for such a detailed title history. Therefore,

rather than documenting each individual 'apana's title history, Part II attempts to document

the history of La' ie's 'apana by analyzing time periods and events which have led to the

Church acquiring interest in them. In doing so, this study refers to a wide variety of

resources including the deed history in Appendix Q developed from the Libers at the

Bureau of Conveyances.

12 Day, 9-10.

13 The author requested to see this document during a telephone conversation with Dawn Wasson onMay 5, 1996. At that time, he was informed by her that he could not view it.

14 Day, 7.

15 Alexander and Baldwin to Zions Securities Corporation, Honolulu, 7 November 1930.

63

CHAPTER 8THE HISTORY OF THE LA'IE 'AINA

The Land Commission granted the last of the seventy-one La'ie Land Commission

Awards on October 18, 1854. Although these awards granted title to the awardees, the ali'i

who received the remainder of the ahupua'a still determined the fate of the maka'ainana's

awards as he ultimately decided how the ahupua'a was managed. In the case of both La'ie

Wai and La'ie Malo'o, this ali'i was W. C. Lunalil0. Lunalilo lost control over his estate

on February 20, 1858, as he consented to a guardianship because "he was wasting his

property by drinking and other bad habits."l The guardians petitioned the courts on

September 27,1861, to sell La'ie Wai and La'ie Malo'o "for the purpose of paying the

debts of the estate."2

Captain Henry S. Howland bought both ahupua'a at a public auction just over a

month later for $5,880 despite the fact that they were under lease to Charles Sumner for

fifteen years.3 Howland, less than a year later, bought L.C.A. 3731 from P. F. Manini

for thirty-eight dollars, thereby making it the first La'ie Land Commission Award obtained

by a non-Kanaka Maoli. Howland appears to have had little interest in La'ie as he leased it

to Catherine Lee twice in the next two years. In addition, Howland sold off 298.5 acres of

La'ie Wai and its fishing privileges to Robert Moffit on March 23, 1863, then sold the rest

1 F. W. Makinney Abstract and Certificates of Title, Abstract of Title ofChurch ofJesus Christ of

Latter-Day Saints in and to All of that Tract ofLand in the District ofKoolauloa, Island of Oahu,Comprising the Ahupuaas ofLaiewai and Laiemaloo (Honolulu: F. W. Makinney Abstract and Certificatesof Title, n. d.), 30.

2 Kingdom of Hawai'i, Supreme Court, "In the Matter of The Guardianship of William C. Lunalilo,"Probate 2413 (2 February 1858): 44.

3 Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "W. C. Lunalilo by Guardianship to Henry S. Howland, Deed,"Liber 14 (6 December 1861): 405-6.

Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "W. C. Lunalilo to Charles Sumner, Lease," Liber 5 (15 May 1852):241.

64

of Ui'ie Wai and Ui'ie Malo'o to Thomas Daugherty, the American Vice-Consul, on July

27, 1863.4

The sale of Ul'ie by W. C. Lunalilo appears to have had little affect on the

maka'ainana living there between 1850-1865 as Charles Sumner maintained his lease for

the entire period and he did not remove non-awardees from the land.5 Nevertheless, the

arrival of the missionaries of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on December

12, 1850, did affect the maka' ainana of La' ie during this period. Less than a year after

their arrival, Elder William Farrer baptized his first convert in La'ie, J. H. W. Kauwahi.6

Farrer, with the help of Kauwahi, established an English school in La'ie within a year.

Their success over the next two years encouraged those joining the Church to try and

secure land in La'ie for the purpose of "pasturage and cultivation."7

La'ie and the Call to Palawai, Lana'i

In 1854, a call went out from Philip Lewis, the mission president, to gather the

saints to the Palawai basin on Lana'i. The original Kanaka Maoli pioneers to Palawai were

primarily from Maui since this island had the greatest number of members and because of

4 Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "H. S. Howland to R. Moffit, Deed," Liber 17 (7 July 1863): 116117.

The deed to Moffit does not contain a clause reserving the rights of the native tenants. Therefore, the298.5 acres sold to Moffit appear not to contain any Land Commission Awards.

Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "H. S. Howland to T. T. Daugherty, Deed," Liber 17 (7 July 1863):117-119.

5 The tax records for Ui'ie show that several of the non-awardees living on the 'aina in 1855 remainedon the 'aina for the next thirty years despite not having interest in the 'aina which they occupied.

6 William Farrer, Biographical Sketch, Hawaiian Mission Report and Diary of William Farrer, 18211906 (Provo: Brigham Young University, 1946),80.

7 Comfort Margaret Bock, "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the Hawaiian Islands"(master's thesis, University of Hawai'i, 1941),56.

65

its proximity to Uina'i.8 By October of 1858, more than eighty-five pioneers had gathered

to the PaHiwai basin.9 To what extent the Church members of La'ie gathered to Lana'i

remains unknown as no list of the Palawai pioneers exists. The tax records for both

PaIawai and La'ie were checked in an attempt to identify the number of pioneers in Palawai

from La'ie. These records are incomplete for both PaIawai and La'ie, but other records

show that a few of the La'ie saints did gather to Palawai.lO No evidence exists to suggest,

however, that the gathering to Palawai affected the Kanaka Maoli saints' Land Commission

Awards in La'ie.

On the other hand, the recall of the Utah Elders in May of 1858 and the appearance

of Walter Murray Gibson in July of 1861 did affect at least one 'apana in La'ie. The

history of Walter Murray Gibson's dealings on Lana'i are well documented, but one item

of interest pertains to La'ie. ll Walter Murray Gibson, during his reign in Palawai, sent

Enoch H. Kawailepolepo around the islands several times to collect funds for the building

up of the community on Lana'i. Enoch records that on March 2, 1863, Nakahili gave

Gibson one piece of land in La'ie.l2 When Walter Murray Gibson was excommunicated

8 Raymond Clyde Beck, "Palawai Basin: Hawaii's Mormon Zion" (master's thesis, University ofHawai'i, 1972),35.

9 Andrew Jenson, "History of the Hawaiian Mission of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-daySaints, 1854-1860." This manuscript is not paginated. The above information can be located under the date6 October 1858.

10 David Cummings, "A History of Laie" (Ui'ie, Brigham Young University-Hawai'i, n.d.), 4.Beck, 109.

11 Jacob Adler and Robert M. Kamins, The Fantastic Life of Walter Murray Gibson: Hawaii'sMinister ofEverything (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1986).

Paul Baily, Hawaii's Royal Prime Minister: The Life and Times of Walter Murray Gibson (New York:Hastings House, 1980).

Thomas G. Thrum, The Shepherd Saint ofLanai (Honolulu: Thorn. G. Thrum, 1882).

12 Thrum, 22.

66

from the Church in 1864, he refused to return any property he had acquired from the

Kanaka Maoli saints. In the case ofthe Ui'ie saints, this property included $11.50, three

horses, and Nakahili's land. However, the deed history in Appendix Q does not show that

Nakahili deeded any land to Gibson nor do any other records at the Bureau of

Conveyances. Moreover, the deed history shows that all seven of Nakahili's 'apana were

later deeded. Therefore, he must have retained ownership of the land that he donated to

Gibson.

The Purchase of La'ie

Between 1861 and 1864, Walter Murray Gibson successfully defrauded hundreds

of Kanaka Maoli from their property, leaving many destitute. President Brigham Young's

response to their situation was that the Church was not under any obligation to care for

them. 13 However, Joseph F. Smith, one of the first Latter-day Saint missionaries to

Hawai'i and a member of the committee that excommunicated Walter Murray Gibson,

advised Brigham Young that the Church should provide a gathering place for the saints in

order to help them both physically and spiritually recuperate from the Lana'i experience.

Following the advice of Joseph F. Smith, Brigham Young called Francis Hammond, a

Hawaiian citizen and former missionary, and George Nebeker to establish "a permanent

mission, thereby providing the native Saints a place to which they could gather and become

better established than they had ever been...."14

Hammond and Nebeker spent about a month searching for a suitable site. Although

they had not located one, Hammond advised Nebeker to return to Utah and sell their

personal properties there in order to have funds to purchase land when it was found. On

13 R. Lanier Britsch, Moramona: The Mormons in Hawaii (Ui'ie: The Institute for PolynesianStudies, 1989), 62.

14 Andrew Jenson, "History of the Hawaiian Mission of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-daySaints, 1861-1885." This manuscript is not paginated. The above quote is located under the date 23December 1864.

67

January 18, 1865, Nebeker set sail for Utah and eight days later Francis Hammond records

in his journal that he:

Called on Mr. T. T. Daugherty and offered him 12,000 dollars for "Laie" with allthe stock, horses and improvements thereon - he would not take less than 14,000dollars. I finally after little consideration consented to give it. I agreed to send hima draft for 3000 dollars in ten weeks from date and pay 5000 dollars more by the1st of July/65 - 6000 dollars in two years from the date bearing 12 per cent annum giving a mortgage on the place for security. I take possession immediately.l5

Leaving Benjamin Cluff and Alma Smith to look over Ui'ie, Hammond set sail for San

Francisco where he wired Brigham Young about the agreement with Daugherty. Upon

receiving the wire from Francis Hammond, President Young asked George Nebeker to sell

his belongings and become a joint owner of Ui'ie with Hammond. Nebeker reluctantly

accepted President Young's request whereupon he was called to be the Hawaiian Mission

President and the first Ui'ie Plantation manager.

Most writers depict that Francis Hammond made a wise choice in acquiring Ui'ie.

For example, Lanier Britsch in Moramona states that "Hammond believed he had made a

good bargain-and he had."16 This does not appear to be the case as Nebeker writes that:

when we got there [July 7, 1865] we found in some things we were very muchdeceived and disappointed. There had been reported by Brother Hammond that agood waterpower on the land suitable for all needful machinery where we found thecreek bed alluded to above completely dry and is usually so nine months in twelveand no value whatever for the above purpose. A flock of sheep supposed to beworth one thousand dollars was of no value and was a remnant of a flock ofspanish sheep diseased with jeab and could not be sold for 25 cents per head. Weemployed men to drive up the stock and found that the cattle had been overratedover 150 head less than had been reported. The cattle that was short and the abovesheep alone would have amounted to $2500. There had been a small crop of cottonreported that was of no value. The worth of the waterpower could not be estimatedfor the purpose we had in view. The brethren with means were so disappointed inseeing the land that they refused to invest in the mission. This threw a damper onthe mission and nothing could be done at the same time the brethren without meanslooked to the place for labor and for their entire support of their families. 17

15 Francis Asbury Hammond, Journal ofFrancis Asbury Hammond (Salt Lake City: HistoricalDepartment of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1971), microfilm.

16 Britsch, 73.

17 George Nebeker to John Taylor, 20 February 1879, Mission Administration Correspondence, 18771915, Historical Department of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. (hereafter cited as Mission).

68

Fortunately for Nebeker and the missionaries accompanying him, Benjamin Cluff and

Alma Smith had planted twenty acres of cotton and twenty acres of corn, some of which

made a decent crop. Upon harvesting this crop in January of 1866, Benjamin Cluff was

informed by many of the older maka'ainana that before cattle were introduced to La'ie

sugar cane had covered the 'aina from "the sea shore to the base of the mountains."18

Upon hearing this, Nebeker made plans to introduce sugar cane to La'ie, but did not do so

until 1867 because the plantation did not have funds to build a sugar mill.

When George Nebeker arrived in La'ie, 125 Kanaka Maoli members of the Church

resided on the land. Nebeker informed these saints at a conference in April of 1866, that

La'ie was purchased as a gathering place for "the purpose of improving their condition by

laboring under the direction of the servants of God" for which they would receive a just

remuneration.l9 Although the Kanaka Maoli saints continued to gather to La'ie, they were

hesitant to work under the direction of the haole (white person) missionaries because of

their experience in Lana'i with Walter Murray Gibson. Their hesitation ended, however,

when they saw the missionaries constructing the sugar mill in 1868.

In exchange for gathering to La'ie and working on the plantation, the Kanaka Maoli

saints received "sufficient land to produce kalo and vegetables, free of taxation, and....

free access to fisheries, game, and timber."20 Many of the saints owned their own land

and developed an agricultural business which in 1871 produced eight schooner loads of

water-melons, gourds, corn and other products.21 This success among the Kanaka Maoli

led several editors in Honolulu to encourage other plantations to adopt the program

18 Jenson, "1861-1885," 7 January 1866.

19 Ibid., 6 April 1866.

20 Ibid., 8 November 1870.

21 Ibid., 4 October 1871.

69

instituted by Nebeker wherein "instead of laborers being bound to serve a certain time, they

are all free [which leads to] more labor being performed by the free than by those

bound."22 The success of this plan was further demonstrated by the fact that 444 Kanaka

Maoli saints had gathered to Ui'ie by April of 1872.

The 'Aina and Geoq:e Nebeker

In June of 1873, George Nebeker was released from his position as the Hawaiian

Mission President and Ui'ie Plantation manager. During his eight years as the leader of the

Church in Hawai'i, Nebeker had successfully established the La'ie Plantation and gathered

over 444 members of the Church to La' ie. He had also become full owner of La' ie Wai

and La'ie Malo'o as he had purchased Francis Hammond's half interest to the land on

February 2, 1872.23 Upon leaving La'ie, however, Nebeker deeded one-third interest in

La'ie to Frederick A. Mitchell, the new plantation manager and mission president,24 On

August 16, 1878, Mitchell deeded his one-third interest back to Nebeker.25 Nebeker then

maintained his interest in La'ie until May 26, 1880, when he deeded La'ie to John Taylor,

the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, for $1.00.26

However, when Nebeker deeded La'ie Wai and La'ie Malo'o to John Taylor, he no

longer had full ownership of the ahupua' a. According to Frederick Mitchell, "Brother N.

22 Antoine R. Ivins, "Plantation History Filled With Interest Present Manager Learns," HonoluluAdvertiser, Sunday, 6 April 1930, Hundredth Anniversary of the Organization of the Church of Jesus Christof Latter-Day Saints. 5, 8.

23 Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "F. A. Hammond to G. Nebeker, Deed," Liber 35 (24 April1872): 62-63.

24 Hawai' i, Bureau of Conveyances, "George Nebeker to Frederick Mitchell, Deed," Liber 38 (13 June1873): 69-70.

25 Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "Frederick Mitchell to George Nebeker, Deed," Liber 75 (28 July1882): 240-241.

26 Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "George Nebeker to John Taylor - Trustee in Trust-, Deed," Liber75 (28 July 1882): 241-242.

70

sold at various times to natives sundry parcels of land on the plantation, ... aggregating 32

9/10 acres of the most desirable portion of land...."27 Mitchell further states that he

surveyed all of these parcels because Nebeker "did not give away deeds of these sales" and

"as the native began to learn the necessity of having written evidences of their homes, they

desired deeds...."28 Mitchell's statement appears to be partially in error as thirteen

deeds, comprising over twenty-four acres, registered at the Bureau of Conveyances bear

Nebeker's signature. This point, along with the fact that not a single deed appears in the

Bureau of Conveyances after Mitchell's surveys, demonstrates that Nebeker most likely

provided all the purchasers with deeds to their land. As far as the remaining nine and nine

tenth acres surveyed by Mitchell, they do not appear at the Bureau of Conveyances and as

such, the plantation appears to have assimilated them back into its land.

In her report to the Council of Hawaiian Organizations, Terry Day claimed that

while George Nebeker was plantation manager he "began purchasing kuleana lands which

obstructed the plans the Church had for the ahupua'a."29 The records at the Bureau of

Conveyances do not support this claim as not a single deed shows that George Nebeker

purchased any 'apana during his tenure as plantation manager. On the other hand, evidence

does exists that Nebeker exchanged some of his konohiki land for the maka'ainana's

'apana. For example, J. P. Cooke of Alexander and Baldwin states in a letter to Zions

Securities that Nebeker made "exchanges ... whereby the owners of some of these small

lots ['apana] which were located in the sugar cane fields conveyed them in exchange for

lots within the village."30 Samuel Woolley's journal entry dated May to, 1905, supports

27 Frederick Mitchell to John Taylor, 20 February 1879, Mission.

28 Ibid.

29 Terry Day, "Kuleana Land Research A Case Study of Laie" (Alu Like, Honolulu, 1976, photocopy),8.

30 J. P. Cooke to J. F. Woolley, Honolulu, 12 September 1941.

71

this claim as he wrote, "I have been at the looking over the Kuleanas with Kekuku and

Adams came and talked over some land matters. He had arranged for some lands to let us

have but upon going over them we found the lot of them had been swapped to Geo

Nebeker in early days."31

In searching over the records at the Bureau of Conveyances, only one exchange

deed involving George Nebeker was located. This deed involved George Nebeker

exchanging a piece of kula to Kupuna for L.C.A. 4345.2, a pahale lot, which Kupuna had

acquired from the heirs of Kaumiumi in 1863. No documentation for any other exchanged

deeds exists for according to J. P. Cooke these exchanges "were made by parole

agreement" and "all of the old people who knew about the transactions have passed

away."32 Nevertheless, the failure to record these deed exchanges did not alienate the

exchanged 'apana from their owners. For according to the deed history in Appendix Q,

after George Nebeker's tenure as plantation manager all but six 'apana were later conveyed

by Kanaka Maoli.33 Therefore, the parole agreements did not convey ownership of the

'apana to the plantation, but only gave it permission to use the land. These agreements,

however, may have led to some 'apana being lost as some of the unlocated 'apana in Table

7 (page 52) exist in La'ie Malo'o where the first sugar cane fields were planted.34

Besides these parole agreements, George Nebeker made similar agreements with

Kanaka Maoli saints gathering to La'ie. These agreements did not create problems while

31 Samuel E. Woolley, Samuel E. Woolley: Mission President, Volume II, 1902-1915 (Ui'ie:Brigham Young University - Hawai'i, n.d.), 229.

Samuel Woolley was La'ie's plantation manger from 1895 to 1921.

32 Cooke, I.

33 These 'apana are L.CA 2739.1, L.c.A. 4271.3, L.c.A. 8580.3, and all three 'apana ofL.C.A.4342. The scattered nature of these six 'apana suggests that if they were exchanged they were not done sofor sugar cane operations.

34 P. P. Musser, "Laie Cane fields," (La'ie: n. p., 1900).

72

Nebeker managed the plantation, but his failure to record them created difficulties for

subsequent plantation managers. For example, in 1891 Ward E. Pack writes that "If I am

correctly informed a native came by invitation of Geo Nebeker and built his house on the

Konohiki's land, and died there, now, one who is not so much as an heir claims it under

him...."35 Pack later found that the title of the land belonged to the Church and

consequently evicted the individual.

In July of 1865 when George Nebeker purchased La'ie, the maka'ainana possessed

all but five of the original 212 'apana. Eight years later when Nebeker left La'ie, the

maka'ainana owned one less 'apana and had acquired 32 9/10 acres of the ahupua'a.

During his time as plantation manager, Nebeker also exchanged some plantation land for

the use of a unknown number of 'apana. These exchanges were made by parole agreement

and did not transfer interest in any of these 'apana to the plantation.

'Awa and the Kahana Hut 1873-1878

On February 27, 1833, the Prophet Joseph Smith, received by revelation a health

code known as the Word of Wisdom. The Word of Wisdom was "not by commandment

or constraint," but as "a principle with a promise."36 When Frederick Mitchell introduced

this concept to the Kanaka Maoli saints, he failed to remember the "not by commandment

or constraint" clause of the Word Wisdom as he told those gathered at a conference on the

October 7, 1873, "that he would not be satisfied unless he had his way in the abolishment

of 'awa."37 Three months after introducing the Word of Wisdom, Mitchell arose at a luau

and "following the ancient custom of the Lord or Konohiki" proclaimed the complete

35 Ward E. Pack to Wilford Woodruff, 14 October 1891, Mission.

36 Joseph Smith, "Section 89," in The Doctrine and Covenants of the Church of Jesus Christ ofLatter-day Saints (Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1982), 135-136.

37 Harvey H. Cluff, Journal and Autobiography ofHarvey H. Cluff, vol 1 (Salt Lake City: HistoricalDepartment of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1972), microfilm, 146.

73

abolishment of 'awa.38 This proclamation included digging up the present crop of 'awa,

which was worth several thousand dollars, and destroying it.39 This announcement sent

the Kanaka Maoli saints into an uproar which did not end until Frederick Mitchell

commanded Lua to go home to his own kuleana.

The frustration of the Kanaka Maoli saints grew over the next few months and

several of them considered moving to Kahana where Ahmee had offered to sell to them the

ahupua'a. Their resolve to leave Ui'ie was strengthened in June of 1874 when Frederick

Mitchell called a meeting and:

asked those who had combined together if they still were determined to go aheadwith the organization and draw off from Laie, to which they answered in theaffirmative. Whereupon President Mitchell "moved that they be disfellowshippedfrom the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints" ... at which thecongregation went into demonic yells and the greater part of the audience rushedout. ...40

Elder Harvey H. Cluff described the events that followed this confrontation as the "most

serious affaire that has transpired in the Hawaiian mission save that of Walter Murray

Gibson."41 This affair resulted in about half of the Ui'ie saints being disfellowshipped

from the Church and moving from Ui'ie to Kahana. Among those that moved were several

individuals who owned portions of at least ten different Land Commission Awards.42

38 Ibid., 147.

39 Lance Davis Chase, "The Hawaiian Mission Crisis of 1874: Character as Destiny," in MannonPacific Historical Society Proceedings, First Annual Conference (Ui'ie: Brigham Young UniversityHawai'i, 1980),95.

40 Cluff, 160.

41 Ibid., 145.

42 Hookaaku and Julia L.CA 3714 and 3933; Kauwe L.CA 3741; Kaio L.C.A. 3773;Kawaipua and Kaloana L.c.A. 3789 and L.c.A. 8355; John Uluhani L.c.A. 3861, L.C.A. 9894, andL.c.A. 4343; and Makole L.C.A. 4003.

74

These individuals did not sell their Ui'ie kuleana despite becoming members of the hui

which purchased the Kahana ahupua'a from Ahmee in 1875.

By 1876, Alma L. Smith, the new mission president and plantation manager, had

reinstated the saints disfellowshipped by Mitchell and established a congregation in

Kahana. The 1874 'awa incident and the formation of the Kahana Hui appears not to have

affected land ownership in Ui'ie as only one deed appears in the Bureau of Conveyances

for Ui'ie between October 1874 and April 1878 and this individual did not move to

Kahana. Moreover, most of the individuals, who owned kuleana in Ui'ie and bought land

in Kahana, deeded away their Kahana land several years before they deeded their Ui'ie

kuleana.

Droua:ht. Rice. and Wells. 1878-1892

On June 20, 1870, Elder William King wrote that "The only difficulty at present is

drouth, which threatens to cause a serious diminution in the yield of Kalo, the chief

dependence of the natives for food."43 This two year drought ended a few months later,

but eight years later, Elder Simpson Molen describes even a worse drought as he examined:

the cane and found a great deal of it almost dead and the ground almost parched thatthe 'maninia' grass which we thought even drought would not affect had becomealmost dry. At the mill and up in the Lois. The drought is drying up many of theKalo beds, many of the natives not getting what they think is their portion of thewater are finding fault and threatening to sue the water master.44

In October of that year, Elder Henry Richards writes that even though it rained "the

prevailing trade wind at this place soon dries the ground and seemingly but little benefit is

43 Jenson, "1861-1885," 20 June 1870.

44 Simpson Montgomery Molen, The Journal of Simpson Montgomery Molen (Salt Lake City:Historical Department for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1972), 81-82.

75

derived therefrom."45 Richards adds that those Kanaka Maoli who had gathered to La'ie

left for other parts of Hawai'i "to seek employment and food to subsist upon."46

In July of 1881, President Harvey H. Cluff made a deal with a Chun See Lin and

Leong Wung that sought to end the problems of these re-occurring droughts. This deal

included leasing fifty acres of rush land to Lin and Wung for twenty years at minimal cost.

They, in tum, would sink an artesian well on the leased land which would be used by them

for their rice and by the plantation for cane and kalo. The deal was made and in November

of 1881 Harvey Cluff reported that when the well was sunk a few feet more it would

supply enough water for "any season of drouth."47

Cluff's optimism did not prevail as Edward Partridge in January of 1883 wrote that

"We have not got the necessary inducements at present for saints to gather in very great

number to this place, not being able to furnish them with Kalo patches ... neither with

steady employment owing to the condition of our crops."48 Partridge further added that if

"we can sink some wells and have water to make the lois for the natives to raise their Kalo

many will be induced to gather here who do not feel to do so now."49 This plan was

executed and two more wells were sunk in July of 1886.

Having overcome the difficulty of droughts, the members of the church in La'ie

faced a new problem with kalo, as well as, the continued problem of finances. In July of

1887, William King wrote that "The famine for Kalo still continues but we are no exception

to many other places. One cause is the rot and the greater cause has been neglect to plant

45 Jenson, "1861-1885," 21 October 1878.

46 Ibid.

47 Jenson, "1861-1885," 13 November 1881.

48 Edward Partridge to John Taylor, 16 January 1883, Mission.

49 Ibid.

76

and cultivate it properly."50 The effects of both the blight and neglect were further evident

five years later when Matthew Noall, the new president and plantation manager, suggested

that "it would be advisable to buyout all the Kuleanas we can. All land is now laying

uncultivated the natives having left it because of disease that affects the kalo grown

there."51 The reason behind Noall's suggestion to buyout these kuleana owners stemmed

from his desire to decrease the debt of the plantation by leasing more land to the Chinamen

for rice and one hundred acres for growing cane.

Throughout the 1890's, the Ui'ie Plantation did increase the number of acres leased

for rice, but it did not lease any land for sugar cane until 1898. The first lease made to

Chun See Lin and Leong Wong in 1882 outlined the boundaries of the leased property and

included the location of 'apana located within these boundaries.52 The La'ie Plantation

managers left the rice growers and kuleana owners to make their own agreements

pertaining to the 'apana found within the plantation's leased property. These arrangements

appear to have set a precedent as later leases followed the same arrangements. 53

Some problems did occur over the leased land despite these arrangements. For

example, a law suit was brought against both the Chinaman and Harvey Cluff in 1882 by

two sisters in order to recover lo'i within the leased land. To recover this lo'i, the sisters

employed the legal services of attorney Alfred Hartwell and the spiritual services of a local

50 William King to John Taylor, 27 July 1887, Mission.

51 Matthew Noall to the Brethren, 27 February 1892, Mission.

52 Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "John Taylor to Chun See Lin and Leong Wung, Lease," Liber 71(3 October 1881): 316-318.

53 Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to Kwong Hip WaiCompany, Lease," Liber 184 (4 June 1898): 57-59.

Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "S. Woolley to Wo Wai, Lease," Liber 218 (9 October 1901): 180183.

77

kahuna pule (prayer expert) who "was to pray away the power of life of the White man."54

The case carne to trial and the two sisters lost as the jury decided that the land belonged to

the konohiki and not to them, even though they had cultivated the lo'i.

This case, although simple, demonstrates a long lasting problem faced by both

Kanaka Maoli and plantation managers in La'ie. This problem sterns from the fact that

many of the maka'ainana of La'ie, who did not receive Land Commission Awards,

continued to live and use the' aina despite not owning it.55 This situation led to an

increased number of disputes when the plantation expanded its sugar cane cultivation or

increased the number of acres leased for rice as Kanaka Maoli felt that the plantation was

encroaching upon their 'aina. A similar problem faced saints who gathered to La'ie,

cultivated land, and erected houses only to have their houses moved and their cultivated

lands ploughed under when the plantation expanded its operations.56

Although these actions appear not to take the welfare of the Kanaka Maoli into

consideration, just the opposite is true from the perspective of the plantation managers and

church leaders. To illustrate, Ward E. Pack stated in 1877 that "our object is to furnish

them with labor, so that they can sustain themselves...."57 Furnishing the Kanaka Maoli

saints with work did not involve focussing on profit either for the plantation or for the

Church. According to Joseph F. Smith, "We work to a great disadvantage financially, on

account of dividing the interest in aid of the colony ie. Instead of hiring the cheapest labor

and running the plantation for all it will make, we hire the members of the church and

54 The CluffFamily Journal (Ann Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilm, n.d.), 12.

55 The tax records for La'ie show that several of the non-awardees living on the land in 1855 remainedon the land for the next thirty years despite not having interest in the land which they occupied.

56 Andrew Jenson, "History of the Hawai'i Mission of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,1886-1900." This manuscript is not paginated. The above information appears under the date 18 January1897.

57 Jenson, "1861-1885," 12 March 1877.

78

devote the profits largely in their interest."58 Edward Partridge's dealings with the rice

growers reflects this same attitude towards the Kanaka Maoli saints as he writes the

"Chinaman ... will cultivate cane if we wish them to, provided we will deal with them as

we do with the natives, but I tell them I would not do that, we make an exception with

regard to the natives as our mission is principally for their benefit. ..."59

Notwithstanding these desires, problems still occurred between the Kanaka Maoli

saints and the plantation. Matthew Noall in 1892 curbed some of these problems by

surveying town lots and renting them for the nominal fee of 25 cents a year. The creation

of this village and the encouragement of the mission presidents led to the development of

"old" Ui'ie which is the housing area makai and Kahuku side of the L.D.S. Temple.

Amidst the changes in land came other minor changes. In 1880, George Nebeker

deeded all of his interest in Ui'ie Wai and Ui'ie Malo'o to John Taylor, Trustee and Trust

for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This same year Ward E. Pack had an

official survey of Ui'ie's boundaries completed which led to the Church's acquisition of

La'ie's Royal Patent 7494. Notwithstanding these and other changes, the La'ie Plantation

only acquired one kuleana according to its records. The records at the Bureau of

Conveyances, however, mention two deeds to the plantation. The first deed dated May 25,

1882, was an exchange deed wherein Kupau and Kupuna exchanged six 'apana to H. H.

Cluff for two acres of plantation land. Although it is not recorded, a re-exchange appears to

have taken place within the next four years as Kupau and Kupuna had deeded their' apana

to others by 1886. The second deed dated July 6, 1892, did convey interest in all three

'apana of L.C.A. 4329 to the plantation.

Several changes occurred in La'ie between 1878-1895. Droughts and disease

ravaged both the sugar cane fields and the kalo lo'i. In an attempt to over come these

difficulties, Harvey H. Cluff leased land to rice farmers at a nominal fee who in return

58 Joseph F. Smith to O. F. Whitney, La'ie, 18 January 1886.

59 Edward Partridge to John Taylor, 12 August 1882, Mission.

79

drilled several artesian wells for the plantation. These leases led to disputes over

boundaries, several of which ended up as court cases.60 These disputes primarily arose

from the plantation expanding its land under cultivation to include land which the Kanaka

Maoli had used for generations or since they had gathered to Ui'ie, but which the planation

owned. To curb these disputes, Matthew Noall surveyed the land makai and Kahuku side

of the present L.D.S. Temple and rented it to Kanaka Maoli. The availability of these lots

and the encouragement of the mission presidents led to much of the population moving

from the lo'i fields to the Ui'ie village. Despite all ofthese changes, the Ui'ie Plantation

acquired interest in only three 'apana during this period.

Mort&a&ed Foreclosures on the 'Apana of La'ie. 1874-1930

In 1874, the government passed "An Act to Provide the Sale of Mortgaged Property

Without Suit and Decree of Sale." This act permitted lenders to grant large loans to Kanaka

Maoli land owners who put their only asset, their land, up as collateral. These loans were

made for short periods of time, two to four years, with extremely high interest rates. The

payments on these loans went towards paying off the interest incurred and the principle

was not due until the end of the loan.61 If the land owner defaulted on his loan, this act

allowed the lender to "auction off a borrower's deed without judicial review."62 Robert

Stauffer explains in his dissertation on Kahana that this act also permitted the lender and the

auctioneer to conspire together to secure the deed.63 For example, W. K. Apua mortgaged

L.c.A. 10822 to A. Jaeger for $125 dollars in 1884. Two years later, Apua defaulted on

60 Taylor v Puakalua, Kingdom of Hawai'i, Supreme Court 2482, (1887).Woodruff v Kau, Kingdom of Hawai'i, Supreme Court 2960, (1891).Kwai v Woolley, Territory of Hawai'i, Circuit Court 4888, (1902).

61 Robert Stauffer, "Land Tenure in Kahana, Hawai'i, 1846-1920" (PhD. diss., University of Hawai'i,1990), 148.

62 Ibid. 148.

63 Ibid.

80

his loan and Jaeger citing the "provisions of Chapter XXXIII of the Laws of 1874"

foreclosed on Apua's land.64 Jaeger then auctioned the land to a Mr. Annitage, who using

Jaeger's money, purchased the land for $200 and then deeded the land to Jaeger for $l.

Terry Day stated that thirty-two of the 'apana in La'ie have suffered mortgaged

foreclosure over the years.65 She adds that the Church "granted mortgages to kuleana

owners that led to foreclosures and finally to Church ownership of the mortgaged

kuleana."66 The deed history in Appendix Q shows that between 1850 and 1930 the

Church only granted two mortgages and neither of these mortgages ended in foreclosure.

Appendix Q does show that between 1884 and 1930 twenty-nine 'apana suffered mortgage

foreclosures. The La'ie Plantation acquired interest in twenty-four of these 'apana, but

they neither made the mortgages nor foreclosed on them. Moreover, the plantation was at

least two to four deeds removed from the foreclosure and did not obtain any of these 'apana

until at least six years after the foreclosure. Therefore, neither the La'ie Plantation nor the

Church mortgaged and foreclosed on any kuleana owners even though they later acquired

interest in twenty-four 'apana which had previously suffered mortgage foreclosure.

The Mi~ration to Iosepa and the Effects on the La'ie 'Apana. 1869-1917

In 1869, Jonathan Napela, a Kanaka Maoli ali'i and one of the first converts to the

Church, received permission from the Hawaiian Government to visit Utah. Over the next

twenty years, a small and steady stream of Kanaka Maoli saints migrated to Utah, so that

by 1889 over seventy-five Kanaka Maoli were living there. These saints were neither

commanded nor called to go to Utah and some were even counseled not to go. For

example, William King reported in February of 1889 that he counseled the saints not to go

to Utah, but it was "impossible to hold them back. They have prayed for the door to be

64 Hawai' i, Bureau of Conveyances, "Affidavit of A Jaeger on Foreclosure of Mortgage of Apua,"Liber160 (5 April 1896),343.

65 Day, 11.

66 Ibid., 8.

81

opened for their deliverance and now that it is open they feel that the Lord had opened the

way for them to gather to Zion."67 Realizing that he could not stop the flow of migrating

saints to Utah, William King sent a letter to President Wilford Woodruff asking him to

settle these saints "in a country place not too far removed from Salt Lake City."68 King

made this request on behalf of the Kanaka Maoli saints because he felt if they resided in

Salt Lake City they would be left "an easy prey to the evils of the world so much of their

time being spent in idleness for want of steady employment."69 King's fear became reality

as the Kanaka Maoli saints did not successfully integrate into the haole population of Salt

Lake City and received the most menial jobs which often left them unemployed part of the

year.70

The unemployed condition of the saints, mixed with a case of leprosy, led Church

leaders to form a committee whose purpose was to locate a suitable location for the Kanaka

Maoli saints to gather. This committee consisted of Harvey H. Cluff, William Cluff, and

Frederick A. Mitchell, all returned missionaries from Hawai'i, and 1. W. Kaulainamoku,

67 William King to Wilford Woodruff, 7 February 1899, Mission.The Kanaka Maoli saints gathered to Utah because the desired to help construct the Salt Lake Temple

and do their temple work. Temple work includes receiving the endowment which means "to receive allthose ordinances in the House of the Lord, which are necessary for you, after you have departed this life, toenable you to walk back into the presence of the Father...." [Boyd K. Packer, The Holy Temple (SaltLake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1982), 34.] Temple work incudes being sealedor bound together as a family for time and all eternity. One of the main reasons the Kanaka Maoli saintsremained in Utah was so they could do this work not only for themselves, but also vicariously for theirdeceased ancestors.

68 William King to Wilford Woodruff, 10 April 1889, Mission.

69 Ibid.

70 Dennis Atkin, "A History of Iosepa, the Utah Polynesian Colony" (master's thesis, BrighamYoung University, 1958),9.

82

George Kamakania, and Napeha.7 1 This committee looked over property throughout Utah

and decided to purchase the John T. Rich ranch in Skull Valley, Tooele County. In their

report to the First Presidency of the Church, the committee described the Rich ranch as a

property consisting of:

1920 acres with twelve miles of good substantial pole and wire fence. Six hundredforty acres of the above is school section and within the pasture enclosure; for thebalance of the 1280 acres he [Mr. Rich] has the government title. Of the otherlands there are two-hundred acres under cultivation. One hundred sixty acres issituated about eight miles from the farm on the foot hills of the western range ofmountains and has a large spring of good water capable of irrigating from fifty tosixty acres and will water a large number of stock.... The irrigation water supplyis an exclusive right to five streams from the eastern range of mountains, whichstreams are conveyed in one ditch, this being the only running stream within aradius of many miles, and in amount equals to one quarter or one third of the watersof City Creeks. In addition, there are a number of large springs on the property,one of which forms a fish pond nearly one thousand feet long and from allindications, an abundant additional supply can be obtained by flowing wells.72

The Rich ranch, for those accustomed to the climate and conditions of Utah,

appeared to be a suitable place to settle, but for the Kanaka Maoli saints, it must of seemed

a desolate and forbidding place. Many individuals have criticized the Church for the

purchase and apparent exile of the Kanaka Maoli saints to "an environment and life alien to

their native culture."73 One must remember, however, that the environment and life

anywhere in Utah, especially Salt Lake City, would have been alien to individuals

accustomed to country life and fertile lands. One must also remember that the Utah

missionaries had to adapt to the Kanaka Maoli culture in Hawai'i. Now the Kanaka Maoli,

who chose to come to Utah, had to adapt to the frontier culture of the American west. The

Church attempted to make this transition easier by calling several individuals, who had

served missions in Hawai'i, to manage and operate the ranch at Iosepa. Nevertheless,

71 Dennis Atkin on page eight of his thesis states that Nepeha was Jonathan Napela. This assertion isincorrect as Jonathan Napela died at the leper colony in Kalapapa, Moloka'i on August 6, 1879.

72 Harvey H. Cluff, Journal and Autobiography ofHarvey H. Cluff, vol 2 (Salt Lake City: HistoricalDepartment of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1972), microfilm, 2-4.

73 Donald J. Rosenberg, "Iosepa's Colonists Return to Hawaii," The Tooele Bulletin (Utah), Tuesday,24 February 1976, 1.

83

"Life was hard; damn hard" as one commentator puts it and after several crop failures many

"abandoned not only the colony but their faith which seemed to fail them."74

These distraught Kanaka Maoli saints turned to their government and petitioned it

for money to return home. Upon returning to Hawai'i, many of these individual began to

circulate negative reports about the Church and Iosepa. In 1894, Kealakaihonua returned

to Hawai'i and furnished an entirely different report of Iosepa to the Kanaka Maoli

saints.75 This positive report led several others to migrate to Iosepa.

The perseverance and the faith demonstrated by the Kanaka Maoli saints in Iosepa

finally began to produce fruit and by 1895 the colony began to tum a profit through

farrning.76 The following years at Iosepa were difficult and trying, but as Lucy Kulani

Pukahi explains, they still had "fun times there" and became self-supporting as they had "a

garden full of vegetables and the only thing they need[ed] to buy at the store was

sugar. ..."77

The Kanaka Maoli saints faced the challenges of Iosepa and produced a town which

flourished in the desert. The hardships and success of Iosepa soon became a memory,

however, as Joseph F. Smith, The President of the Church and for whom Iosepa was

named, announced in the October 1915 General Conference that a temple would be built in

Lii'ie in the next few years. President Joseph F. Smith, in this same year, visited Iosepa

and explained that if the saints wanted to return to Hawai'i they were more than welcome to

74 Lambert Florin, "Iosepa, Utah" in Ghost Town Trails (Seattle: Superior Publishing Company,1963), 183.

75 Matthew NoaH to First Presidency, 4 December 1894, Mission.Jenson states that H. N. Kekauoha circulated positive reports about Iosepa (Jenson, "1886-1900," 28February 1895.); while NoaH claims in his letter to the First Presidency that Kekauoha was the primeinstigator of negative reports about Iosepa.

76 Atkin, 38.

77 Jacqueline Chang, "My Mother, Lucy Kulani Pukahi" (La'ie, n.d), 1.

84

do so and that the Church would pay transportation expenses for those who desired to

return to Hawai'i but could not afford it.78 The exodus from Iosepa, though happy, was

also difficult for many of the saints. Several had been born in Iosepa and most had buried

loved ones there. One account of this exodus states that many of the saints "followed the

wagons on foot and with big tears running down their faces, they kept looking back at their

homes and uttering "Good-bye Iosepa, good-bye Iosepa."79

The colony at Iosepa existed from August 1889 to January of 1917 and at its height

had 228 residents. Iosepa's population fluctuated throughout the years due to births,

deaths, and individuals migrating to and from Hawai'i. The continual migration of Kanaka

Maoli saints between Hawai'i and Utah and the fact that the Ui'ie Plantation acquired

interest in 110 'apana during the period of Iosepa's existence has led to conjecture that the

La'ie plantation managers induced individuals to migrate to Iosepa so that the plantation

could acquire their 'apana.

Records of those who lived in Iosepa are difficult to locate. Appendix R contains a

list of individuals collected from various sources who were definitely known to have lived

in Iosepa at one time or another. Of those names appearing on this list, only Joseph and

Miriam Kekuku and Gus Kaleohano owned 'apana that were acquired by the La'ie

Plantation during the Iosepa period. The plantation's acquisition of these' apana occurred,

however, after the Kekuku's and Kaleohano had returned to La'ie. As such, the La'ie

Plantation's acquisition of their nine'apana was not a result of their move to Iosepa.

Expansion. Woolley. and Acquisition. 1895-1919

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, through the operations of the La'ie

Plantation, acquired interest in only four 'apana between 1865 and 1895. Over the next

78 Atkin, 79.

79 Rosenberg, 1.

85

thirty years, however, the plantation acquired interest in at least 122 'apana.80 Two factors

can be attributed to this increased acquisition of La'ie's 'apana. First, the Church

implemented new policies which focussed on getting out of debt. 81 These policies meant a

shift in focus for the La'ie Plantation from one centered on the Kanaka Maoli saints to one

focussed on their well-being, but also on profits.

The second factor affecting the increased acquisition of La'ie's 'apana was Samuel

E. Woolley. Woolley had served a four year proselyting mission to Hawai'i in the 1880's.

In 1895, he was called on a second mission to Hawai'i as the plantation manager, a

position he would hold until 1921. Under his administration, the plantation doubled its

acreage under cultivation, shifted milling operations to Kahuku, and acquired the majority

of its La'ie 'apana.

To understand the events that transpired during Woolley's administration, one must

attempt to understand the man and the condition of the plantation at that time. On

Woolley's first mission to Hawai'i, he stated that "This is the place to try a man's grit; for

the natives are ignorant, dirty, and ill-mannered," but Woolley adds that they "were very

kind and do all they can for me."82 On his second mission, Woolley appears to have

reciprocated the aloha shown to him by the Kanaka Maoli saints as he continually sacrificed

for their well-being. Joseph Kekuku demonstrates this point as he stated that Woolley

80 Several deeds to the Church contain phrases to the affect that I, the seller "give, grant bargain, selland convey unto the said Joseph F. Smith, Trustee in Trust aforesaid, his successors and assigns forever.All my right, title and interest in" L.c.A. # located at U'ie. This phrase make it highly difficult todetermine whether the whole award or just certain 'apana were conveyed to the Church. The deed historyshows that Kanaka Maoli definitely deeded interest in 99 'apana to the Church, and the possibility existsthat this number could be as high as 126 when the phrase above is taken into consideration.

81 Britsch, 107-108.

82 Jenson, "1861-1885," 9 February 1881.

86

"always protect us and make us feel safe and happy inside."83 Gus Kaleohano adds that

"Woolley would always encourage the people to fann, not to allow these lands to go to the

weeds. 'Here is the water, plenty of water, plant, plant taro, plant taro. "'84

The records show that Samuel E. Woolly was loved by most if not all Kanaka

Maoli saints that associated with him. Therefore, the question arises as to whether Woolley

used his association with the Kanaka Maoli saints and position as plantation manager to

pressure them into selling their lands. None of the other plantation managers had done so,

so why might have Woolley? When Woolley took over the plantation in 1895, the old cane

fields were exhausted as they had been continually cultivated for the last thirty years

without fertilizer. 85 As such, new fields needed to be plowed to replace the old ones.

Before the new fields could be cultivated, a new source of water was needed to irrigate the

fields. In 1898, Woolley installed a Riedler pump and a Corlies engine.86 This pump

increased water supply by four million gallons of water a day enabling them to increase the

amount of acreage under cultivation.87 To increase acreage cultivation, however, Woolley

had to relocate several houses belonging to Kanaka Maoli saints who had gathered to La'ie.

He also had to acquire the right to cultivate several kuleana. In 1897, Woolley relocated

several homes and during the next twenty-four years Woolley obtained the right to cultivate

the kuleana by purchasing them.

83 Kathleen Dickenson Mellen, "By their fruits ..." Paradise in the Pacific, 62, no. 8 (August 1950):4.

84 Gus Kaleohano, interviewed by Clinton Kanahele, in Interviews Conducted by Clinton Kanahe1e,June 11, 1970 to June 29, 1970 (La'ie: Brigham Young University - Hawai'i, n.d.), 7.

85 Jenson, "1886-1900," 31 March 1894.

86 Ivins, 8.

87 J. B. Musser, "Laie - Home Place of the Church in Hawaii" (Historical Department of the Churchof Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, Salt Lake City, n. d., photocopy), 11.

87

Much controversy surrounds the acquisition of these 'apana as some individuals

claim that the Woolley stole them or obtained them through exerting undue influence on

Kanaka Maoli kuleana owner.88 Others say that their relatives and friends willing gave

land to the Church.89 An analysis of the deeds and historical records suggest that the

methods used by the plantation to obtain interest in the majority of their' apana during

Woolley's administration were both legal and ethical. To illustrate, Woolley acquired

interest in twenty-four 'apana that Kanaka Maoli lost due to mortgage foreclosures. The

plantation purchased the interest in twenty-one of these 'apana from two non-L.D.S.

individuals, Andrew Adams and Mrs. E. Kahuila Wilcox. Adams, who helped manage the

Kahuku Plantation, appears to have had complete ownership of the eleven 'apana which he

sold to the La'ie Plantation. On the other hand, Mrs E. Kahuila Wilcox, who sold ten

'apana to the plantation, does not appear to have held full interest in her 'apana as Woolley

later purchased interest in these 'apana from three other individuals. Woolley similarly had

to purchase interest in the final three 'apana from multiple individuals, some of who were

members of the Church.

Deed Exchan2es

Deed exchanges have created the most controversy surrounding how the Church

obtained interest in the La'ie 'apana. According to Terry Day, the Church acquired interest

in about 100 'apana through deed exchanges which consisted of exchanging "less desirable

ahupuaa land for more desirable kuleana land."90 By the strictest definition of deed

exchange, participants legally conveyed or transferred their interests in their land to one

88 Undue influence is "any improper or wrongful constraint ... whereby the will of a person isoverpowered and he is induced to do or forbear an act which he would not do...." Henry Campbell Black,Black's Law Dictionary, 5th ed. (St. Paul Minn.: West Publishing, 1979), 1370.

89 Ken Baldridge, "Tour of Historic Laie," in The Monnon Pacific Historical Society Proceedings,Seventh Annual Conference (Ui'ie: Brigham Young University-Hawai'i, 1986),7.

90 Day, 8-9.

88

another by exchanging deeds to their lands. The Ui'ie Plantation acquired interest in ten

'apana in this manner. Nine of these 'apana were acquired during the period Woolley

operated the plantation.

In a broader definition of deed exchange, participants exchange deeds under the

agreement "to act fairly, truly, to grant and re-grant, exchange and re-exchange certain

property with certain property."91 The La'ie Plantation only made two deed exchanges of

this type during Woolley's administration. One was to Lyons B. Nainoa for the use of

'apana one and three of L.c.A. 3873 and the other to Kaiwihaona Opio Enoka for the use

of L.C.A. 3864.2 and L.c.A. 4297.3. Both Nainoa and Enoka also made second deed

exchanges for these same'apana to the La'ie Plantation on the day of their first exchanges.

These second exchanges, unlike their first, conveyed their interest in their' apana to the

plantation. This dual deed exchange raises the question of which deed carried the legal

precedence, the one which conveyed interest or the one which did not. Since both Nainoa

and Enoka later sold the plantation land which they had obtained in the exchange, the deed

which conveyed interest in their 'apana appears to have been the one which was legally

binding.

A third definition might be loosely applied to the term deed exchange in the case of

the La'ie Plantation. By this definition, a kuleana owner exchanged deeds with the

plantation through monetary exchanges rather than land exchanges. To illustrate, a kuleana

owner would convey his interest in his quarter acre 'apana by selling it to the La'ie

Plantation for $50.00. In tum, the La'ie Plantation would convey its interest in a quarter

acre lot by selling it to the kuleana owner for $50.00. The La'ie Plantation obtained interest

in twenty 'apana through this version of deed exchange.

The La'ie Plantation obtained interest in thirty 'apana through these three types of

deed exchanges. In tum, the kuleana owners received konohiki land. Day claims that the

land exchanged for these kuleana was less desirable. Day bases her statement on the fact

91 F. W. Makinney, 147.

89

that most Land Commission Awards contained land best suited for the needs of the

awardee. This fact, although true in 1848, was not necessarily true during the first two

decades of this century nor should one forget that the konohiki received just as good if not

better land than the awardees.

A review of the land exchanged to the kuleana land owners supports both of these

points. To illustrate, Lyons Nainoa exchanged two lo'i 'apana for one parcel of land of

equal size located near the La'ie Wai stream amidst the majority of La' ie's lo'i 'apana.92

In addition, Solomon and Kipi Kahawaii exchanged two lo'i 'apana for land near one of

the plantation's wells, thereby giving them access to a constant supply of water.93

Finally, many of the kuleana land owners desired to move their agricultural activities from

their mauka kuleana to a location closer to their homes. The plantation fulfilled this desire

by exchanging konohiki land near the kuleana land owner's home for their kuleana.

Fact Versus Lel;:acy

Day's study claimed that the Church mortgaged kuleana and then foreclosed on

them. She also claimed that the Church obtained interest in approximately 100 'apana

through deed exchanges of less desirable land. A detailed analysis of the deeds reveals that

no evidence exists to substantiate either of these claims. Nevertheless, Appendix Qdoes

show that the La'ie Plantation did acquire interest in twenty-four 'apana that had been

previously subject to mortgage foreclosures. In addition, the plantation obtained interest in

thirty' apana through deed exchanges. None of these' apana were acquired under false

pretenses nor was the konohiki land exchanged for these 'apana less desirable.

92 Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to Lyons B. Nainoa,Deed," Liber 382(14 November 1912):153-154.

93 Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to S. Kahawaii,Deed," Liber 280(10 September 1906): 474-475.

Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to K. Kahawaii, Deed,"Liber 280 (19 September 1906): 475-476.

90

Overall, the Ui'ie Plantation obtained interest in 43 'apana through purchasing

'apana which had suffered mortgaged foreclosures and through deed exchanges. The

plantation obtained the remaining 83 directly from the kuleana owner for cash. As such,

the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, through the La'ie Plantation, legally

acquired interest in all 126 of its'apana that it obtained between 1865 and 1925. This fact

supported by the deeds at the Bureau of Conveyances is beyond reproach. Nevertheless,

legacies are not often built on tangible evidence, but rather on perception and belief.

Therefore, the question remains as to how Samuel E. Woolley obtained interest in La'ie's

'apana. The records do not supply sufficient data to specifically identify how Woolley

obtained each 'apana, but Woolley's journal and other historical records do provide

adequate details to identify several different methods he employed.

First, Woolley obtained interest in some 'apana by purchasing them on the open

market. For example, Woolley writes on September 22, 1897, that he "went up mauka to

look at some land that Mr. Peterson has for sale."94 A month later he writes that "I bought

three apanas of land from Wm. S. Peterson...."95

Another way Woolley obtained interest in 'apana was through individuals taking the

initiative to contact him for the purpose of selling or exchanging their 'apana with the

plantation. For example, Woolley writes on August 28, 1902, that "Keau came and

swapped three smallioi for a piece of land the same size ... also Kalima."96 Then on

April 21, 1903, Woolley writes that Kaui "wanted to swap a piece ofland at Laiemaloo for

94 Samuel E. Woolley, Samuel E. Woolley, Volume I ofMission President (La'ie, Brigham YoungUniversity-Hawai'i, n. d.), 153.

95 Ibid., 160.

96 Woolley, "Volume II," 47.

91

some at Kokololio."97 Finally, Hilo Kaihe sold his nine 'apana to the plantation because

he was moving his family back to the Big Island.

Woolley was also pro-active in obtaining kuleana as he writes on May 4, 1905, that

he "was out looking over native Kuleanas."98 A few days later he writes, "I was up

through the lands looking over some Kuleanas with Nainoa, Pono, Kekuku, Ioela Kupau

and Kamauoha"99 Three weeks later Pono Luukia sold her kuleana to Woolley. 100

Woolley used all three of these methods during the first fifteen years of

administration. A check of the deeds in Appendix Q shows that the majority of the' apana

purchased by Woolley occurred during this time period. As such, Woolley appears to have

acquired the majority of the 'apana in La'ie both legally and ethically.

Nevertheless, Woolley's journal also shows that he used some methods which

although legal remain ethically questionable. For example, Woolley employed Joseph

Kekuku to speak with Kanaka Maoli kuleana owners and purchased their lands from them.

Once purchased, Kekuku turned the kuleana over to the La'ie Plantation whereupon he

received a commission for his efforts. This method appears to have saved the plantation

money as Woolley writes that he "settled with him [Kekuku] on some land that he bought

for us from Kupukupu he made 59.85 cents as I gave him commission, half of the price he

saved us...."101

In addition, on May 10, 1905, Woolley writes that he had "made arrangements with

Kamakea to get her lands for 20 years for 25.00 per year. Also with Anna Haaheo...

97 Ibid., 85.

98 Ibid., 227.

99 Ibid., 228.

100 Ibid., 233.

101 Ibid., 244.

92

."102 Two days later Woolley also made a deal with "Mrs. Kaiwihaona of Laiemaloo" and

two weeks later he made a deal with Kuahine for a three year lease. 103

All of these leases appear to have been made by parole agreement as none of them

are registered at the Bureau of Conveyances. The twenty year lease made by Kamakea

Kaleohano lasted only six and half years as she and her husband, Gus, deeded their interest

in their six 'apana to the Church. Similarly, Anna Haaheo's lease ended thirteen years later

when she and her husband, M. D. Kaniela, deeded their three 'apana over to the Church.

Kaiwihaona also deeded her land over to the La'ie Plantation. Therefore, only Kuahine's

lease of those mentioned did not result in deeds to the Plantation. This fact is of extreme

importance as his lease lasted only three years while the other leases were for a much

longer period of time.

Woolley's journal ends on May 13, 1915, which leaves one to speculate as to why

these leases ended several years early and why the kuleana owners deeded their land to the

plantation. Nevertheless, little doubt exists that Woolley actively sought to obtain La'ie's

'apana, a fact brought out by the number of 'apana he obtained during his tenure as

plantation manager. His own journal also shows that he was not above using under

handed methods to acquire kuleana. For example, on May 22, 1907, Mrs. J. B. Castle

inquired about obtaining title to a piece of land she leased from the plantation. Woolley

stated in response to her inquiry that "I told her if she could get a Kuleana I would

exchange with her which would give her title to the place."104

Woolley's journal also shows that he made himself the law in La'ie as he writes

that:

we called all the people together who are cultivating any of the lands under theKonohiki nui and I gave them to understand what our terms were that if they

102 Ibid., 229.

103 Ibid, 229 and 232.

104 Ibid., 314.

93

wanted to continue they must comply with the rules.... If not we would have totake the Loi away from those who were all the time pulling against us in everyway.I05

These two examples demonstrate that Woolley sought to obtain kuleana through

unethical means and used his authority as plantation manager to manipulate the actions of

the Kanaka Maoli of La' ie by controlling the use of the land. Therefore, the possibility

exists that Woolley exerted his influence as plantation manager and mission president in an

effort to persuade kuleana owners to sell their 'apana to the plantation instead of leasing

them, but no conclusive evidence supports this hypothesis. The kuleana owners' long term

leases did tum into deeds and some descendants of these kuleana land owners feel, "that

there were some inequities with regard to the land transactions."106 On the other hand,

some descendants express "complete satisfaction with their ancestors' trades."107

Moreover, Gus Kaleohano, who leased and later deeded land to Woolley, states that

Woolley looked out for the Kanaka Maoli saints while Joseph Kekuku, who deeded several

'apana to Woolley, adds that "he was our father."108 Finally, William Kanakanui states

that Woolley "was highly respected among the Hawaiians of this land."109 These

statements show little to support the hypothesis that Woolley used undue influences to

obtain the 'apana in La'ie.

One might argue, however, that since Woolley led both the spiritual and economic

institutions in La'ie that kuleana owners might not speak out against him for fear of being

105 Ibid., 355.

106 Sylvia M. Geddes, "Laie, A Church Colony in Hawai'i, Its Modem Aftermath" (U'ie, 1985,photocopy), endnote 117.

107 Ibid., 34.

108 Mellen, 4.

109 William I. Kanakanui, interviewed by Clinton Kanahele, in Interviews Conducted by ClintonKanaheIe, June 11, 1970 to June 29, 1970 (U'ie: Brigham Young University - Hawai'i, n.d.), 22.

94

excommunicated from the Church. Although a sound possibility, the history of the Kanaka

Maoli saints does not support such a hypothesis. To illustrate, they wrote letters to Church

leaders against Walter Murray Gibson in 1864 and again in 1874 against Frederick

Mitchell. However, not a single letter could be found in any of the Church holdings to

demonstrate displeasure with Samuel E. Woolley. This fact bears extreme relevance as

Joseph F. Smith, the President of the Church, was no stranger to the Kanaka Maoli saints

as he had lived in La'ie between 1885-1887.110 He, more than any other president of the

Church, had endeared himself to the Kanaka Maoli saints and concerned himself with their

welfare. As such, the Kanaka Maoli saints would surely have written to him if they felt

Woolley had abused them in any manner.

Laying this argument aside, the kuleana owners still had to sign the deeds to their

lands. Most of these deeds were in Hawaiian and as such the kuleana owner knew what

was in the document. Moreover, all of the deeds were signed in front of a Notary Public

who wrote:

On this day of [date], personally appeared before me [name ofkuleana land owner]known to me be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrumentwho acknowledged to me that he executed the same freely and voluntanly for theuses and purposes therein set forth. 111 (emphasis added)

Therefore, the kuleana owners deeded their lands to the La'ie Plantation of their own free

will and choice. If at any time such was not the case, the kuleana owners could have asked

Judge Lyons Nainoa, attorney George Kekauoha or to W. K. Apuakehau, a Notary Public,

who were among their ranks, to charge Woolley with exerting undue influence in his

efforts to obtain La'ie's kuleana. However, not only were these three individuals not

approached, but all them deeded 'apana to the La'ie Plantation during the Woolley

administration.

110 Joseph F. Smith was one of the first missionaries to Hawai'i. He was also instrumental inconvincing Brigham Young to form the Ui'ie colony. The Kanaka Maoli saints demonstrated theirfondness for Joseph F. Smith by naming Iosepa, Utah after him.

111 Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "K. Puahi to Wilford Woodruff, Deed," Liber 172 (28 October1897): 444.

95

Zions Securities Corporation

On June 25, 1919, with the Hawai'i Temple almost completed, Wesley E. Smith

arrived in Honolulu and replaced Samuel Woolly as the Hawaiian Mission President.

Woolley stayed on as the plantation manager until in June of 1921 when he was released

from his twenty-six year mission and replaced by Antoine R. Ivins. Ivins had never served

a mission in Hawai'i and was unfamiliar with both the plantation and the Kanaka Maoli

saints. As such, the primary focus of the plantation shifted from helping the Kanaka Maoli

saints to a strictly business venture. This point was made evident by the fact that the

Church deeded all of the land in Ui'ie which was "not associated directly with its

ecclesiastical mission" to Zions Securities Corporation on December 18,1925.1 12 This

deed signified that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, under the direction of

President Heber J. Grant, felt that it had accomplished the physical aspect of its

ecclesiastical mission of teaching the Kanaka Maoli saints the arts of industry.

At first, the completion of the Church's mission was not evident to many of the

Kanaka Maoli saints as they viewed Zions as a continuation of the La'ie Plantation.

However, Zions' sale of nearly all ofthe La'ie beach front property in 1927 made this

change apparent. This sale led to bitter feelings among some Kanaka Maoli saints that the

Church had cheated them out of their kuleana awards. To understand this sentiment, one

must realize that many of the kuleana owners gave their land to the Church with the

understanding that they were building up the Kingdom of God on earth, a kingdom to

which they belonged. As such, they did not perceive that the land was going to an entity,

but rather to an 'ohana (family) for the purpose of fulfilling their physical and spiritual

needs. In tum, they perceived that the plantation's land was to be used for the same

purposes which it had been since 1865. Therefore, when Zions, under the direction of

112 William H. Clawson, "Zions Securities Corporation in Hawaii" (Ui'ie, Brigham YoungUniversity-Hawai'i, 1989, photocopy), 2.

Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances. "Heber J. Grant, Trustee in Trust, to Zions Securities Corporation,Deed," Liber 804 (Honolulu: 18 December 1925), 249-257.

This deed did not contain all of the land acquired by the Ui'ie Plantation.

96

Antoine Ivins, attempted to sell almost the entire beach front property of Ui'ie, George K.

Kekauoha, Joseph Kekuku, J. A. Kahiona, K. Lua, and Mrs. Abraham Keaulana objected

to the sale on the basis that the property "belonged to the Church members and was to be

enjoyed by them solely for Church purposes."113 None of these individuals held

ownership in the land being sold by Zions, but as members of the Church they felt they had

a right to determine how the land was to be used.

The Ui'ie Plantation managers had personally handled difficulties, even court cases,

but Zions sought the legal counsel of its Salt Lake City attorneys even though Antoine Ivins

was a lawyer. This act demonstrated to many of the Kanaka Maoli saints that Zions did not

share the same attitude towards them as had the Ui'ie Plantation. Lance Chase, an L.D.S

historian, claims just the opposite as he states that "One of the peculiar features of

Application 772 to the land court demonstrates the leadership's sensitivity to Hawaiian land

issues."114 These features included a right of way to the beach and the assurance that "all

the fisheries and fishing rights belonging to Zions" would remain in the possession of the

residents of Ui'ie. 115 These "peculiar features" of Land Court Application 772 do not

exhibit Zions' sensitivity to the Kanaka Maoli ofUi'ie, but rather manifest that the Land

Court simply retained the established fishing and gathering rights for the Kanaka Maoli of

La'ie.l 16

113 Lance Davis Chase, "The Meek Did Not Inherit the Earth: The 1927-1928 Laie Beach Front Saleand Lawsuit," in The Mormon Pacific Historical Society Proceedings, Fourteenth Annual Conference.(La'ie: Brigham Young University-Hawai'i, 1993),51.

Hawai'i, Land Court, Application 772 (Honolulu: Land Court 1927),52.

114 Chase, "The Meek," 55.

115 Ibid., 55-56.

116 Alan Murakami, "Konohiki Fishing Rights and Marine Resources," in The Native Hawaiian

Rights Handbook ed. by Melody Kapilialoha MacKenzie (Honolulu: Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation:Office of Hawaiian Affairs, 1991), 173-195.

Paul Lucas, "Gathering Rights," in The Native Hawaiian Rights Handbook ed. by Melody KapilialohaMacKenzie (Honolulu: Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation: Office of Hawaiian Affairs, 1991), 223-228.

97

The manner in which Zions handled this court case demonstrated that the aloha

shown by the Church throughout the plantation era was gone, and a separate corporation

based on business had taken its place. Zions further exhibited its business first attitude in

1932 when the executive committee of Zions Securities Corporation, not the Church,

authorized William Waddoups, the new president of Zions, to "'formulate plans to make

this place [Ui'ie] self-supporting. "'117 Waddoups plan was to lease land not being used to

"responsible saints" who under the direction of Zions would cultivate it with the

understanding that if they did not, the land would revert back to Zions.

This plan in essence kept Zions in control of Ui'ie as they would only lease

property to "responsible saints," not sell it. This condition did not exist under the

plantation as the plantation managers sold several acres of land to individuals who desired

to buy property. Moreover, the plantation had leased town parcels to Kanaka Maoli renters

for only 25 cents per year. Zions changed this policy and by the 1970's leases had become

so expensive that people began to hate Zions. 118 When Zions finally started selling the

land to tenants, the prices were so astronomical that many of the tenants could not purchase

the land. In 1978, Dr. Kenneth Baldridge, with the encouragement of two Church General

Authorities, brought suit against Zions to lower the cost of his leasehold land to enable him

to buy the land on which he had built his houses. 119 This suit, among other complaints,

led Zions to sell its leased property in fee simple at prices far below the market price in the

early 1980's.120

117 Clawson, 4.

118 Clinton Kanahele to Castle Murphy, 7 November 1975, Castle H. Murphy Collection, Box 4Folder Item 1, Brigham Young University.

119 Chase, "The Meek," 56.

120 Geddes, 13.

98

In 1985, Zions divested itself of real estate holdings in Hawai'i and eight years later

Zions Securities Corporation completely withdrew from Ui'ie. Notwithstanding its

departure, Zions left a legacy of Kanaka Maoli land alienation based on adverse possession

which still plagues the community.

Zions Securities Corporation's Le2acy of Adverse Possession in La'ie

In 1870, the Kingdom of Hawai'i passed "An Act Limiting the Time, Within Which

Actions May be Brought to Recover Possession of Land" which legalized adverse

possession.l 21 Adverse possession allows a stranger to acquire ownership of someone

else's land or it allows an individual with interest in the land, but who has a break in title,

to acquire title to the land. 122 In either case, the adverse possessor must possess the land

in question for twenty years and must show evidence of actual, exclusive, continuous,

hostile, open and notorious possession of the land in question. The Native Hawaiian

Rights Handbook defines these requirements by stating that:

Actual use means that the adverse possessor uses the land in opposition to the trueowner's rights. Notorious visible possession means that the owner is put on noticeof a claim of right. Continuous means that the use continues hostile for the statutorylength of time. Exclusive use means excluding use by the true owner. 123

Because of the nature of these requirements, not only does the adverse possessor have to

maintain hostile possession of the land for twenty years, but the owner, who after being

notified of the adverse possessors intent, must fail to evict the adverse possessor.

During its years of operations in Ui'ie, Zions Securities Corporation developed a

legacy of adverse possession. This legacy began in 1926 when Antoine Ivins stated in a

letter to Zions' headquarters that:

121 Cynthia Lee, "The Doctrine of Adverse Possession," in The Native Hawaiian Rights Handbook ed.by Melody Kapilialoha MacKenzie (Honolulu: Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation: Office of HawaiianAffairs, 1991), 139.

122 Ibid., 119.

123 Ibid., 131.

99

There has never been a good map made of the property and ... the landholderswho held the old kuleanas are in many instances dead and their heirs do not knowwhere these various pieces of land are to be found. . .. It will not be long untilmany of these old claims that are not now being occupied could be claimed byadverse possession if it were so desired.l24 (emphasis added)

Ivins appears not to have initially attempted to follow his desires as he furnished kuleana

maps to the Tax Maps Bureau from which they identified the locations of 171 'apana.

However, he later laid the foundation for Zions to adversely possess several kuleana as he

closed the La'ie Plantation and leased its lands, without adjudicating their boundaries, to

the Kahuku Plantation.l25 Ivins failure to establish boundaries resulted in several 'apana

being lost in the cane fields and subject to adverse possession.

In 1976, Terry Day stated that Zions Securities "may have completed or be in the

process of completing adverse possession on as much as 30 per cent of their' apana

holdings; that is, some 40 'apana."126 Kali Watson, in a report on adverse possession,

cited Day's work and claimed that "ZCS may have completed or is in the process of

completing adverse possession on 40 'apana in La'ie."127 Watson adds that one should

look under the "Circuit Court Index under Zion's Security Corporation (ZSC) as plaintiff'

as Zions "successfully acquired large areas of land through adverse possession."128 In

making this statement, Watson was not referring to land in La'ie, but rather to land located

in other areas ofthe Ko'olau Loa district. In 1989, Linda S. Parker stated in her book,

Native American Estate, that "Zions Securities Corporation, obtained ownership of large

124 Antoine Ivins to Zions Securities Corporation, Lii'ie, 29 November 1926.

125 Cooke, 1.

126 Day, 11.

127 Kali Watson, "Report for Alu Like - Adverse Possession" (Alu Like, Honolulu, 1977,photocopy), 27.

128 Ibid., 27.

100

areas in Ui'ie, O'ahu, through adverse possession."129 Parker makes this statement based

on Watson's report and the fact that "In 1978 the circuit court indexes listed over ten pages

of individuals, mainly Hawaiians, who had lost land to the corporation."130 Finally, Dawn

Wasson, the President of Hui Malama 'Aina '0 Laie, in a 1990 letter to Zions stated that:

In July of 1865 the Church purchased 6,600 acres of land in Laie. At thattime there were approximately (underlined) 3,000 acres of land in and around Laieowned by kuleana landowners (in our files we have detailed information on whoowned this land, how it was lost and so on). Of the approximately 3,000 acressome 2,043 have been taken over by Zions Securities by adverse possession.These lands (2,043 acres) are unknown as "unlocated kuleanas."

In addition to the acquisition of the 2,043 acres that Zions Securities tookover by adverse possession completing that process, incidentally, by the destructionof boundaries, ZIOns also acquired 650 acres by five principal methods (the term"Zions" is here used interchangeably with the Church since Zions does not getestablished in Hawai'i until around 1930)....

2. adverse possession (frequent);Now if you add 2,043 to 650 you get approximately 2,700 acres. That

leaves 300 acres ofkuleana lands out of the onginal3,000 acres (10% roundedoff).... Zions is now in the process of acquiring much of the 300 acres byadverse possession and multiple claims, a process that will be completed by1992.131 (emphasis added)

Earlier it was stated that legacies are often not based on tangible evidence, but rather

on perception and belief. Zions' legacy of adverse possession proves this point as both

Day and Watson carefully explained that Zions "may have completed or be in the process of

completing" adverse possession in Ui'ie. Their choice of words demonstrates that adverse

possession might have or may possibly occur in Ui'ie. Linda Parker's statement that Zions

"had obtained ownership of large areas in Ui'ie, O'ahu, through adverse possession,"

however, moves Day's and Watson's statements from the realm of possibility to an explicit

129 Linda S. Parker, Native American Estate: The Struggle Over Indian and Hawaiian Lands(Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1989), 118.

130 Ibid., 118.

131 Dawn Wasson to Don W. Kleinman, Ui'ie, 29 April 1990.This letter contains several inaccurate statements. For example, the Church purchased only 6,197 acres

in 1865. Zions Securities Corporation was established in Hawai'i in 1926. Three thousand acres ofkuleana land do not even exist in the entire Ko'olau Loa District of O'ahu, let alone in and around Ui'ie.

Wasson does provide a disclaimer on page one of her letter by stating that "I want to emphasize thatthis is an outline only to be supplemented by details to be provided to you [Kleinman] when we meet. ..."

101

statement of action. An action, which according to Wasson, the Church of Jesus Christ of

Latter-day Saints participated.

Both Kali Watson and Linda Parker refer to the Circuit Court Indexes to show that

Zions had adversely possessed land. Zions Securities Corporation does appear on about

ten pages of the indexes as Parker indicated. 132 However, only seven of the approximately

thirty cases appearing under Zions entail adverse possession cases and not one of these

adverse possession court cases deal with land in Ui'ie.l 33 Therefore, according to both the

Circuit Court Indexes and the actual court cases, Zions Securities Corporation has never

acquired interest in any kuleana land in Ui'ie through adverse possession let alone the

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This statement does not mean that Zions

Securities Corporation did not possess land in Ui'ie against the will ofkuleana owners,

which it did, but rather that Zions Securities and the Church have not acquired interest in

any of Ui'ie's kuleana through adverse possession according to the Circuit Court records.

132 Hawai'i, First Circuit Court, General Index, 1924-1981 vol. 71 (Honolulu: First Circuit Court,n.d).

The following indices were also checked, but Zions Securities Corporation, The Church of Jesus Christof Latter-day Saints, and the Ui' ie Plantation nor anyone of their official representatives names appear in anycases which involve adverse possession in Ui'ie. First Circuit Court Equity Index 1848-1900, First CircuitCourt Probate Index 1st Series 1848-1900, First Circuit Court Probate Index 1901-1908,First Circuit Court Law Index, 1899 to 1905 2nd Series, First Circuit Court Law Index, 1848 to 1900,Compared Copy ofCriminal and Divorce Index Taken From General Index, All Divisions to June 1908,Compared Copy ofLaw Index taken From General Index All Divisions to June 1908, Compared Copy ofLaw Index Probate and Equity Index Taken From General Index All Divisions to June 1908, Index ofAllDivisions From 1908-1913, Index ofAll Divisions From 1913-1916, Index ofAll Divisions From 19161919, Index ofAll Divisions From December 31, 1919 to December 31, 1923,; General Index, 1982-1986vol. 26, and the computerized index at First Circuit Court.

133 Zions Securities Corporation v Puuwaawaa, HI 51 (1st Cir 1972).Zions Securities Corporation v Po1ani, HI 45 (lst Cir 1972).Zions Securities Corporation v Makaia, ill 35 (lst Cir 1972).Zions Securities Corporation v Kukupaina, ill 115 (lst Cir 1974).Zions Securities Corporation v Kauo1ani, HI 145 (lst Cir 1974).Zions Securities Corporation v Kaaimanu, ill 319 (lst Cir 1974).Zions Securities Corporation v Hoomana, ill 178 (1st Cir 1974).

102

CHAPTER 9CONCLUSIONS

The legacy of the 1848 Mahele and Kuleana Act of 1850 is one of Kanaka Maoli

land alienation. This alienation began when these two events transfonned the Kanaka

Maoli land tenure system into one of private ownership and alienated the' aina from more

than seventy percent of Kanaka Maoli. Those maka'ainana who retained their 'aina entered

the system of private land ownership with small and poorly surveyed awards which did not

contain a non-alienation clause. Without this clause, the unprotected awardees fell victim to

property taxes, mortgages foreclosures, and adverse possession which resulted in all but

6.6% of the Land Commission Awards on the island of 0'ahu being alienated from Kanaka

Maoli by 1936.

In 1976, Terry Day found that approximately 24% ofthe La'ie 'apana remained in

the possession of Kanaka Maoli.l This high retention of awards among the Kanaka Maoli

of La'ie can be directly attributed to how the owners of the ahupua'a managed it during the

first forty-five years after land privatization. The ownership of La'ie Wai and La'ie Malo'o

transferred hands three times between 1850-1865. However, these changes did not affect

the maka'ainana of La'ie as both ahupua'a were under lease between 1850-1865 to Charles

Sumner who did not disrupt the lives ofthe maka'ainana by removing the non-awardees

from the 'aina. In 1865, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints purchased the

ahupua'a of La' ie Wai and La' ie Malo' 0 for the purpose of gathering the Kanaka Maoli

members of the church into one place so that they could be taught "the arts of industry" for

the benefit of their spiritual and physical well-being.2 To teach these arts of industry, the

Church operated a sugar plantation which hired members of the Church and devoted the

majority of its profits to supporting them. For the first thirty years of its operation, the

1 This figure drops to 23% after adjustments are made for the ten 'apana Day counted as being in La'ie,but do not exist in La'ie.

2 Brigham Young to King Kamehameha V, 24 March 1865, Miscellaneous F.O. & EX., Hawai'i StateArchives.

103

Ui'ie Planation was unlike any other sugar plantation in Hawai'i as its workers were

allowed to work when they wanted to do so. In addition, the Kanaka Maoli of La'ie were

given access to the resources of the ahupua'a and were encouraged to maintain their

awards. These characteristics of the La'ie Planation not only developed a feeling of 'ohana

and aloha in La'ie, but also developed a community which became an example of industry

and labor throughout the Islands.

Between 1865 and 1895, the La'ie Plantation acquired interest in only four 'apana.

Over the next thirty years, however, the plantation acquired interest in at least 122 'apana.

Two factors contributed to the plantation's increased acquisition of La'ie's 'apana during

this period. First, the Church implemented new policies which focussed on getting out of

debt.3 These policies shifted the focus of the La'ie Plantation from one centered on the

Kanaka Maoli to one dually focussed on their well-being and on profit.

The second factor affecting the increased acquisition of La'ie's 'apana was Samuel

E. Woolley who was the La'ie Plantation manager and Hawaiian Mission President

between 1895 and 1921. Under Woolley's management, the plantation increased its

productivity and doubled the acreage under cultivation, but it also acquired interest in 116

'apana in La'ie. There is much controversy surrounding these acquisitions, especially in

regard to mortgage foreclosures and deed exchanges. An analysis of the Libers at the

Bureau of Conveyances shows that the La'ie Plantation acquired interest in twenty-four

'apana that had previously suffered mortgage foreclosures. However, the plantation was at

least two to four deeds removed from these foreclosures and did not obtain any of the

'apana until at least six years after the foreclosures occurred. The Libers also show that the

plantation acquired interest in thirty' apana through two types of deed exchanges: land for

land and money for land wherein each party sold and bought an equal amount of land from

each other for the same price. An analysis of the konohiki land exchanged to the kuleana

owners for their 'apana reveals that the kuleana owners received desirable land located near

3 R. Lanier Britsch, Moramona: The Mormons in Hawaii (Ui'ie: The Institute of Polynesian Studies,1989), 107-108.

104

a source of water or next to their homes. The Ui'ie Plantation also made a few deed

exchanges with Ui'ie kuleana owners that stipulated that the land would revert to the

original owner at a later time. In each of these cases, the plantation did return the 'apana to

the original owner.

Overall, the La'ie Plantation acquired interest in forty-three 'apana through deed

exchanges and by purchasing' apana which had suffered mortgaged foreclosures. The

plantation obtained its remaining eighty-three 'apana directly from the kuleana owners for

cash. As such, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, through the La'ie

Plantation, legally acquired interest in all 126 of the'apana that it obtained between 1865

and 1925. Nevertheless, Samuel E. Woolley obtained some kuleana deeds through

questionable means, including using other individuals to purchase the deeds for the

plantation. In addition, the reason why twenty year kuleana leases were deeded to the

plantation several years before the leases expired remains uncertain.

On December 18, 1925, President Heber J. Grant, feeling that the Church had

completed its physical mission in La'ie, deeded all of its non-ecclesiastical land to Zions

Securities Corporation. Zions managed the land in La'ie for the next sixty years as a

business venture focussed solely on profit. Zions displayed this new attitude by increasing

rent and leasing kuleana to the Kahuku Plantation without permission of the owners or

adjudicating the boundaries of the kuleana. These last two acts left kuleana susceptible to

adverse possession. However, the Circuit Court cases show that Zions Securities

Corporation's has not adversely possessed kuleana in La'ie despite having done so in other

ahupua'a of the Ko'olau Loa district.

In conclusion, the legacy of Kanaka Maoli land alienation attributed to the Church

of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in La'ie is not based on evidence, but rather on

unsubstantiated claims. The Church acquired interest in the majority, if not all, of its 126

'apana in La'ie both legally and without undue influence on the kuleana owner. These last

two statements do not imply that the evidence provided in this study completely absolves

the Church from the legacy of Kanaka Maoli land alienation in La'ie. On the contrary, this

105

study reveals that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, in essence, betrayed the

faith and trust of the Kanaka Maoli saints when President Heber J. Grant deeded the

Church's non-ecclesiastical land to Zions Securities Corporation. To understand this point,

one must realize that for sixty years the Church's sole purpose in Ui'ie was to improve the

physical and spiritual condition of the Kanaka Maoli saints by having them labor "under the

direction of the servants of God."4 Realizing this purpose, many kuleana owners deeded

their lands to the plantation with the understanding that their kuleana were going to an

'ohana for the purpose of fulfilling their physical and spiritual needs. Therefore, when

Heber J. Grant deeded the Church's non-ecclesiastical land to Zions Securities, he removed

the central aspect of the 'ohana in Ui'ie, the 'aina. This act, above any performed by the

plantation managers, alienated the 'aina by opening the door for Zions whose sole purpose

in La'ie was profit without regard for the Kanaka Maoli.

4 Andrew Jenson, "History of the Hawaiian Mission of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,1861-1885." This manuscript is not paginated. The above quote is located under the date 6 April 1866.

106

APPENDIX ALAND COMMISSION RECORDS ANALYSIS FOR LA'IE

The Land Commission required each maka'ainana to submit a claim, provide two

witnesses to it, and pay for a survey of the claim. These claims are recorded in the Register

ofClaims to Land and in the Native Register. l The testimonies are recorded in the Foreign

Testimony and in the Buke Hoike.2 The awards are in the Mau Palapala Hooko.3 All three

of these sources are indexed in the Land Commission A wards: Numerical Index Including

Testimony and Registers (Index).4 This Index contains some errors and fails to identify

the names and locations of the non-awarded claims. Taking these factors into

consideration, this analysis researched the Land Commission records in four stages:

Stage 1 identified from the Index all of the Land Commission Awardees in La' ie.

Stage 2 identified all of the non-awarded claims surrounding the La'ie awardeesin the Index.

Stage 3 examined the Register ofClaims to Land and the Native Register to verifythat all those claims in stage one and two contained 'rona in La'ie. Thisstage also examined those claims surrounding the stage one and two claimsto determine if they included 'aina in La'ie.

Stage 4 analyzed the awards, testimonies, and claims to determine the residency ofeach claimant.

These four stages resulted in five lists of individuals who either lived or cultivated 'aina in

La'ie between 1846-1848.

1Kingdom of Hawai' i, Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles, Register ofClaims to Land, 3vols. (February 1846-September 1848; reprint, Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1964).

Kingdom of Hawai'i, Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles, Native Register, 9 vols. (February1846-March 1848; reprint, Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1964).

2 Kingdom of Hawai'i, Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles, Foreign Testimony, 16 vols.(1846-1853; reprint, Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1964-1974).

Kingdom of Hawai'i, Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles, Buke Hoike, 13 vols. (18461852; reprint, Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1964).

3 Kingdom of Hawai'i, Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles, Mau Palapala Hooko, 10 vols.(1846-1855; reprint, Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1964).

4 Hawai' i, State Archives, Land Commission A wards: Numerical Index Including Testimony andRegisters. (n.p.: n.d.).

107

Land Commission Awardees of La'ie

Seventy-two Kanaka Maoli received Land Commission Awards in La'ie.5

Land Commission Awardees of La'ie

PAKOLua

PIAMAHuNALllMAHOE

MAHAKEAKainoahouMoanauliMAnEkulHuPuWAHAWIAMAKAAlAAJ..AOPAlA

LArnLoHELOHE

PAHUMOA

PuLEHuPAIAKEAPAAKAHINAPAEKO

NAKAIDLINAHELEHELENAPAHU

HANoKalawaiaholonaKUKU

KALAKEAoKALEo

KOIKauhaneKAUNAHIKOULA

KANEHOA

KaonohiKAIOLOlllA

KAPULE

KEAWEKAPUAOKAHALA

KAUALEWA

WaikupulaniKANAKANUIKAUAIKAUA

KAHOALE

KOAlAUKANU

KALUA

KAMANoKAHOUKUA

KALouKEKllll<AHALELAAuKAPUAOKAHALA

KAUAIOMANOKAUMIUMI

KnKUAPUU

PuPUKAKahuailiaKAMAMAE

KAKAuWm. LunaliloKAUHALEKUAKELnwAIWAIOLE

PALlI

KuanonoehuNAWAI

POOUAHI

PuHIPAKAPUN!PekaULUKOU

a Residency: LA'IE, Miilaekahana, Honolulu, Unknown.

An analysis of their claims, testimonies, and awards identified that fifty-eight awardees had

pahale (house lots) in either La'ie Malo'o or La'ie Wai. Of the remaining fourteen

awardees, four resided in Malaekahana, one lived in Honolulu, and the residency of nine

could not be determined from the information.6

5 See Appendix B on page 112 for the Land Commission Award number for each awardee and showsthe location of his claim, testimony, award, and Royal Patent within the Land Commission records.

6 The location of Eku's, Waikupulani's, Moanauli's, Kaonohi's, and Kainoahou's pahale could not bedetermined from the given information while the claims, testimonies, and awards of Kalawaiaholona,Kauhane, Kuanonoehu, and Peka never mention a pahale 'iipana.

108

Non-Awarded Testimony Claimants of La'ie

Thirty-four Kfulaka Maoli submitted claims and provided witnesses to their Ui'ie

claims, but did not receive awards.7

Non-Awarded Testimony Claimants ofUi'ie

s. W. Kaaipuaaa

ManuikiMokulama

EWAKALIMAKUHIWaawaLalapa

PalupaluPuuNewaNamokakaiaNamamokuPuahiHina

KUahuiaLakeeKauhiKEaNEKahiamoeKuhemaKaumeheniho

KuluahineKiniKamaneoKuaioKeowahaKAWAlllNEWIWILoNO

PaukoaKiniKabawaiiKekauanuiLauwaluPAKl

aResidency: LA'IE, Unknown, Malaekahana, Hau·ula.

Of these thirty-four claims, only six had pahale in Ui'ie while five lived in Malaekahana,

and one lived in Hau'ula. Neither the claims nor testimonies of the remaining twenty-two

claimants state the location of their pahale.

Relatives Mentioned in the Testimonies and Awards of La'ie

The testimonies of both the Land Commission awardees and non-awarded

testimony claimants identified seventeen relatives that lived in La'ie before 1848.8

Pre-1848 Claimants' Relatives of La'ie

KAAULANI (PIA's WIFE)aKAAwA (KALA'S WIFE)KELIIWAIWAJOLE JR. (KAMANO'S SON)KAPEAID (KEONE'S DAUGHTER)Lalapa's (Wife)Kawahinewiwi's (Two Children)Ola (Kainoahou's Wife)KANEIPu (KOALAUKANU'S CHll...D)

aResidency: LA'IE, Unknown

Makeekaou (Kuanonoehu's Wife)Kanio (Kuanonoehu's Sister)Kupihea (Kuanonoehu's Daughter)Kamaka (Kuanonoehu 's Daughter)Namakuaina (Kuanonoehu's Daughter)Kalili (Kuanonehu's Son)PAAKAHI (PuNI's SON)KOIHAE (KEAWE'S DAUGH1ER)

7 See Appendix C on page 115 for the Land Commission number for the non-awarded testimonyclaimants of Ui'ie and the location of their claims and testimonies within the Land Commission records.

Although Mokulama's and Kuhema's claims do not actually state they cultivated 'iiina in Lii'ie, thelocation of their claims show they did. For example, Kuhema sent his claim registration in from Lii'ie andhis claim mentions having 'iiina in Mahakea's and Kapuaokahala's 'rona both of who are Lii'ie LandCommission awardees. Mokulama claimed 'iiina in Kokololio which is situated in Lii'ie Malo'o. (MaryKawena Pukui, Samuel H. Elbert, and Esther T. Mookini, Place Names ofHawaii rev. ed. [Honolulu: TheUniversity Press of Hawai'i, 1974], 116).

8 See Appendix D on page 116 for the testimony in which each relative appears.

109

These testimonies also mention another nineteen individuals and the Land

Commission Awards show an additional twelve individuals cultivating 'aina in La'ie.

These individuals are not listed here because the testimonies and awards were processed

after 1850 and it is uncertain from the information provided whether a named individual

cultivated 'aina in La'ie before February 14, 1848.9

La'ie Claimants Rei:isterini: Only Claims

Two Kanaka Maoli, Hikiau and Palii, registered only claims to 'aina in La'ie

between 1846-1848.10 The records show that Palii lived in La'ie, but the location of

Hikiau's residency could not be identified.

Names Mentioned in Claims of La'ie

La'ie's one-hundred and ten claim registrations contained another twenty-eight

names of Kanaka Maoli who cultivated 'aina in La'ie between 1846-1848.11

Pre-1848 'Aina Cultivators of La'ie

AlewahineHopaeHopuniKahiaeleKaioeKalakee

KaloaanaKaloanaKalimanuiKalyaiewaKamauohaKanaikaua

KanaikawaKauwaiawaKawaikoleKawahanaKaweohana

KokalimakahiKuKaa-KuhapaKQi.

KumuhahauKualonoehuNahuluNapaikiPaI:J,Y1TlSS

* MisspeHiRg/\'ariatisRS sf ClaiH:lants NalTles.

A comparison of these individuals and the location of their' aina with the

information in the registered claims, testimonies, and awards shows that Pahumoo, Kua

Kaluaiewa, Napaiki, and Kui are misspellings or variations ofPahumoa, Kauhalekua,

9 See Appendix E on page 117 for the testimonies and awards in which each of the post-1848testimony and award cultivator appears.

10 See Appendix F on page 118 for Hikiau's and Palii's claim information.Hikiau's claim mentions 'liina at Nioi which is situated in Lli'ie Wai.

11 See Appendix G on page 119 for the Land Commission records in which the pre-1848 cultivators ofU'ie appear.

110

Kalua, Napaeko, and Kekui,12 The following names appear as though they might also be

variations or misspellings, but no correlation can be drawn from the information to support

this hypothesis.

Name Comparisons

NamesKalakeeKanaikauaKanaikawaKalimanuiKokalimakahiKuulonoehu

Possible VariationsKala, LakeeKauaikauaKauaikauaKalimakuhiKalimakuhiKuanonoehu

Of those individuals in the Ui'ie cultivators list, twenty appear to have cultivated

'aina in La'ie sometime between February 14, 1846 and February 14, 1848, but their

residencies could not be determined from the available information)3

Summary of Land Commission Records' Population Analysis

The analysis of the Land Commission records generated five distinct lists

encompassing 145 individuals who either claimed or cultivated 'aina in La'ie between

1846-1848.14 Of these individuals, only sixty-five were identified as living within the

borders of La'ie while eleven were identified as living outside of La'ie and the residency of

sixty-nine remained unknown.

12 Napahu's and Pahumoa's claims border each other in Keokilehelehle where Pahumoo supposedly hada claim. As such, Pahumoo appears to be a misspelling of Pahumoa.

Keliiwaiwaiole's 'iipana which adjoins Kua's 'iipana also adjoins an 'iipana of Nawai according to histestimony. However, Nawai's award places Kauhalekua in the position of Kua.

Kaluaiewa appears in the registration of Paakahi's claim, but in Paakahi's testimony and survey, Kaluaappears.

Keliiwaiwaiole's testimony in which Napaiki and Kui appear corresponds to 'iipana 2 of his claim. Inthe Keliiwaiwaiole's award, Napaeko and Kekui appear at the positions of Napaiki or Kui in 'iipana 2.

13 Because Kaloaana and Kanaikawa appear only once in the claims while Kaloana and Kanaikauaappear at least twice, Kaloaana and Kanaikawa were treated as misspellings of Kaloana and Kanaikaua assuch the number listed for the Pre-1848 'Aina Cultivators ofUi'ie is twenty, not twenty-two.

14 This number must be considered conservative as the possibility exists that the Land Commissionrecords do not mention all the cultivators in Lii'ie between 1846-1848.

111

--tv

Table 8. Land Commission Awardees of Ui'ie

L.C.A. # NAMES NATIVE REGISTER FOREIGN TESTIMONY AWARDS ROYAL PATENTS

Vol. Page Date Vol. Page Date Ivol. Page Date No. Vol. Page Date238-E Pakolu -- - -- -- -- - 4 420 2-4-1851 3094 13 671 7-8-18562739 Pia 3 614 12-29-1847 11 259 - 6 361 7-25-1851 - -- -- --

10 60a 10-21-18513696 Mahunalii 4 145 1-4-1848 11 281 -- 6 342 7-25-1851 926 4 511 9-7-18523697/ MOOoe 4 146 1-5-1848 11 281 -- 6 369 7-25-1851 6481 24 333 5-26-18733709 4 151 1-5-18483699 MOOakea 4 146 1-4-1848 11 253 - 6 352-3 7-25-1851 927 4 513 9-7-18523699-B KainoOOou -- -- - 11 322 - 8 275 5-30-1851 7430 27 165 3-16-1880

8 275 16-25-185'3708 Moanauli 4 150-1 1-8-1484 11 251 - 6 358 7-25-1851 1296 5 167 7-11-18533714 Maii 4 154 1-8-1484 11 251 - 6 348 7-25-1851 922 4 503 9-7-18523729 Eku 4 158 1-10-1848 11 277 -- 6 364 7-25-1851 - - -- --3731 Ihupuu 4 159 1-3-1848 11 247 - 6 371-2 7-25-1851 3508 15 249 2-2-18573741 Waha 4 160-1 1-5-1848 11 263 - 6 374-5 7-25-1851 1303 5 181 7-11-18533743 Wi 4 161 1-5-1848 11 305 - 6 372-3 7-25-1851 3011 13 505 6-10-18563773 Amaka 4 165 1-4-1848 11 243 9-21-1850 6 367-8 7-25-1851 918 4 495 9-7-18523774 Alaala 4 165-6 1-4-1848 11 245 -- 6 365-6 7-25-1851 932 4 523 9-7-18523789 Opala 4 168-9 1-4-1848 11 287 5-15-1850 6 351-2 7-25-1851 6534 24 439 5-26-18733807 Laielohelohe 4 173-4 1-4-1848 11 249 -- 6 376 7-25-1851 929 4 517 9-7-18523859 POOumoa 4 179 1-5-1848 11 261 -- 6 354 7-25-1851 5068 20 363 7-19-18623861 Pulehu 4 179-80 1-5-1848 11 263 -- 6 363 7-25-1851 2048 8 477 8-7-18553864 Paiakea 4 180 1-7-1848 11 261 -- 6 652 11-28-185 --- --- -- --3873 PaakOOi 4 183 1-4-1848 11 275 - 6 345-6 7-25-1851 -- -- -- --3933 Napaeko 4 189 1-1-1848 11 257 - 6 439-40 8-26-1851 1533 5 643 7-13-18533936 Nakahili 4 189-90 1-7-1848 11 299 - 6 343 7-25-1851 3009 13 501 6-10-1856

8 586 2-7-1853 6538 24 447 5-26-18733939 NOOelehele 4 191 1-5-1848 11 255 - 6 355 7-25-1851 1301 5 177 7-11-18533945 NapOOu 4 196 1-3-1848 11 285 -- 6 344-5 7-25-1851 1306 5 187 7-11-18534003 Hano 4 208-9 1-5-1848 11 277 -- 6 365 7-25-1851 1444 5 463 7-13-18534039 Kalawaiaholona 4 214 ND 11 306 - 6 347 7-25-1851 -- -- -- -4061 Kuku 4 218-9 1-3-1848 11 271 - 6 360 7-25-1851 3010 13 503 6-10-1856

~

>2~

\.}oa::a::~

~>~~

O~2~

>2~;a>><~c=~~~rJ).

o~

~>1~~

........w

Table 8. (Continued) Land Commission Awardees of Ui'ie

L.C. # NAMES NATIVE REGISTER FOREIGN TESTIMONY AWARDS ROYAL PATENTSVol. Page Date Vol. Page Date Vol. Page Date No. Vol. Page Date

4269 Kala 4 235 1-5-1848 11 311 -- 6 373 7-25-1851 928 4 515 9-7-18524270 Keao 4 235 1-5-1848 11 308 -- 6 366-7 7-25-1851 1302 5 179 7-11-18534271 Kaleo 4 235-6 1-5-1848 11 265 -- 6 376-7 7-25-1851 3387 14 567 11-12-18564272 Koi 4 236 1-7-1848 11 269 - 6 340-1 7-17-1851 2917 13 297 5-21-18564280 Kauhane 4 237 1-7-1848 11 307 -- 6 362 7-25-1851 -- -- -- --4281 Kaunahi 4 237-8 1-7-1848 11 241 -- 6 357 7-25-1851 7614 28 359 6-27-18824283 Koula 4 238 1-6-1848 11 298 - 6 356 7-25-1851 923 4 505 9-7-18524286 Kanehoa 4 238-9 1-7-1848 11 295 - 9 369 10-18-1854 - -- - --4288 Kaonohi 4 239 1-5-1848 11 294-5 - 6 355 7-25-1851 - -- -- --

3-20-1852 7 295 8-8-18534290 Kaiolohia 4 239 1-4-1848 11 293 - 6 371 7-25-1851 3008 13 499 6-10-18564291 Kapule 4 240 1-5-1848 11 296 - 6 344 7-25-1851 3389 14 569 11-12-18564293 Keawe 4 240 1-5-1848 11 298 - 6 364 7-25-1851 2915 13 293 5-21-18564297 Kapuaokahala 4 240-1 1-7-1848 11 269 - 6 359 7-25-1851 1446 5 467 7-13-18534298 Kaualewa 4 241 1-5-1848 11 279 - 6 341 7-25-1851 - -- - --4300 Waikupulani 4 241 1-4-1848 11 297 - 4 678 1-13-1852 3098 13 679 7-8-18564301 Kanakanui 4 242 1-5-1848 11 273 - 6 529-30 10-21-1851 2916 13 295 5-21-1856

7 303 8-10-18534302 Kauaikaua 4 242 1-4-1848 11 267 - 6 368-9 7-25-1851 1300 5 175 7-11-18534325 Kahoale 4 258 1-5-1848 11 291 - 6 358 7-25-1851 1304 5 183 7-11-18534326 Koalaukanu 4 258-9 1-5-1848 11 309 - 6 366 7-25-1851 - -- -- --4329 Kalua 4 260 31-12-184" 11 306 -- 6 345 7-25-1851 931 4 521 9-7-18524331 Kamano 4 261 1-7-1848 11 310 -- 6 352 7-25-1851 3383 14 559 11-12-18564333 Kahoukua 4 262-3 1-7-1848 11 292 - 6 342-3 7-25-1851 925 14 509 9-7-18524334 Kalou 4 263 1-14-1848 11 305-6 -- 6 354 7-25-1851 924 4 507 9-7-18524336 Kekui 4 263-4 1-5-1848 11 308 - 6 653 1-9-1852 1298 5 171 7-11-18534338 Kahalelaau 4 265 1-10-1848 11 293 -- 6 359 7-25-1851 920 4 499 9-7-18524342 Kapuaokahala 4 285 1-10-1848 11 295 -- 6 373-4 7-25-1851 3509 15 253 2-2-18574343 Kauaiomano 4 267 1-3-1848 11 298 - 6 347 7-25-1851 1305 5 185 7-11-18524345 Kaumiumi 4 286 1-3-1848 11 297 - 6 353 7-25-1851 3413 14 617 11-12-1856

--.j:::..

Table 8. (Continued) Land Commission Awardees ofUi'ie

L.Co # NAMES NATIVE REGISTER FOREIGN TESTIMONY AWARDS ROYAL PATENTSVol. Page Date Vol. Page Date Vol. Page Date Noo Vol. Page Date

4361 Kii 4 271 1-3-1848 11 309 -- 6 370-1 7-25-1851 1297 5 169 7-11-18534451 Kuapuu 4 301-2 1-17-1848 11 301 -- 6 377 7-25-1851 -- -- -- --4514 Pupuka 4 313 1--1848 11 302 -- 6 440-1 8-26-1851 919 4 497 9-7-18526989 Kahuailua 5 411 1-18-1848 11 291 -- 6 370 7-25-1851 930 4 519 9-7-18528355 Kakau 5 545 1-18-1848 10 150 -- 4 600-1 1-13-1852 -- -- -- --8440 Kamamae 5 565 1-17-1848 11 307 -- 6 363 7-25-1851 7993 34 157 4-21-18938443 Kauhalekua 5 565-6 1-4-1848 11 307 - 6 362 7-25-1851 921 4 501 9-7-18528559-B woe. Lunalilo 8 535 ND 5 512 -- 10 488 6-19-1852 7494 25 223 8-14-18808580 Keliiwaiwaiole 4 355-6 2-11-1848 11 321 -- 6 651 1-9-1852 6539 24 444 4-9-1873

7 708-9 7-12-18538580-B Palii - - -- 11 322 - 6 441 29-5-1851 1299 5 173 7-11-18538580-C Kuanonoehu -- -- - 11 323 - 6 585 10-21-1852 1307 5 189 7-11-18539894 Nawai 4 486-7 2-7-1848 11 283 -- 6 361 7-25-1851 - -- - --10619 Poouahi 4 571 2-4-1848 11 303 -- 6 767 5-21-1852 3097 13 677 7-8-185610748 Puhipaka 4 584 1-8-1848 11 302 9-24-1850 6 375 7-25-1851 - - -- --10763 Puni 4 585-6 1-8-1848 11 304 - 6 374 7-25-1851 1445 5 465 7-13-185610822 Peka 4 602 2-10-1848 11 324-5 -- 6 652 1-9-1852 6521 24 413 9-4-187310928 Ulukou 4 614 ND 11 304 -- 6 357 7-25-1851 3007 13 497 N/D

3095 13 673 8-7-1856

a Buke Hoike

APPENDIX CNON-AWARDED TESTIMONY CLAIMANTS OF LA'IE

Table 9. Non-Awarded Testimony Claimants ofUi'ie

L. C. # NAMES NATIVE REGISTER FOREIGN TESTIMONYVol. Pal!e Date Vol. Pal!e Date

1115 S.W. Kaaipuaa 2 634 12-1-1847 11 325 ---8539a 4 359 2-10-1848 11 325 ---3695 Manuiki 4 145 1-5-1848 11 251 ---3700 Moku1ama 4 146 1-7-1848 10 31 ---3728 Ewa 4 158 1-7-1848 11 245 ---3740 Waawa 4 160 1-6-1848 11 265 ---3789-B Ka1imakuhi 4 168-9 1-4-1848 11 294 ---3804 Lalapa 4 172 1-4-1848 11 249 ---3865 Pa1upalu 4 180 1-4-1848 11 285 ---3870 Puu 4 182 1-10-1848 10 149 ---3936-B Newa 4 189 1-7-1848 11 285-7 ---3938 Namakaokaia 4 191 1-5-1848 11 301 ---3938-B Namamoku 4 191 1-5-1848 11 301 ---3938-B Puahi 4 190 1-5-1848 11 303 ---3998 Hina 4 206 1-7-1848 11 279 9-23-18503999-B Kuahuia 4 206-7 1-5-1848 11 269 ---4021 Lakee 4 212-213 1-4-1848 11 279 ---4273 Kauhi 4 236 1-5-1848 11 301 ---4275 Keone 4 236 N/D lOb 357 4-28-18544279 Kahiamoe 4 236 1-5-1848 11 288 ---4285 Kuhema 4 238 1-7-1848 3 525 ---4292 Kaumeheniho 4 240 1-5-1848 11 289 ---4299 Ka1uahine 4 240 1-5-1848 11 288 ---4327 Kini 4 259 1-13-1848 11 290 ---4328 Kamaneo 4 259-260 1-5-1848 11 289 ---4330 Kuaio 4 260-261 1-14-1848 11 292 ---4339 Keowaha 4 265 1-10-1848 lOb 346 4-19-18544346 Kawahinewiwi 4 267 1-5-1848 11 290 ---5470 Lono 5 95 1-25-1848 11 300 ---7727 Paukoa 5 447 1-18-1848 10 150 9-25-18508439 Kini 5 564 1-17-1848 11 289 ---8537 Kahawaii 4 344 1-18-1848 10 149 ---9895 Kekauanui 4 487 N/D 11 300 ---9968 Lauwalu 4 502 2-7-1848 11 279 ---10821 Paki 4 602 2-20-1848 11 324 ---

a Claim submitted twice.

b In Buke Hoike

115

APPENDIX DPRE·1848 CLAIMANTS' RELATIVES OF LA'IE

Table 10. Pre-1848 Claimants' Relatives ofUi'ie

CLAIMANT RELATION NAME FOREIGN TESTIMONYVolume Page

Pia Wife Kaaulani 10 60a

Kala Wife Kaawa 11 311Kamano Son Keliiwaiwaiole Jr. 11 310Keone Daughter Kapeahi 10 357a

Lalapa Wife N/A 11 249Kawahinewiwi Two Children N/A 11 290Kainoahou Wife Ola 11 322Kuanonehu Wife Makeekaou 11 323Kuanonehu Sister Kanio 11 323Kuanonehu Daughter Kupihea 11 323Kuanonehu Daughter Kamaka 11 323Kuanonehu Daughter Namakuaina 11 323Kuanonehu Son Ka1ili 11 323Koalaukanu Child Kane!lriu 11 309Puni Son Paak . 11 304Keawe Daughter Koihae 11 298

a In Buke Hoike

116

APPENDIX EPOST-1848 CULTIVATORS OF 'AINA IN LA'IE MENTIONED IN

TESTIMONIES AND AWARDS

Table 11. Post-1848 Cultivators ofUi'ie Mentioned in Testimonies and Awards

NAMES IN L.C.A. TESTIMONY lIN L.eA. AWARDAkuino 3731Elemakule 3933 3936 4291 4343 4451 3936Hakaalani 3859

(Hakailani 3773(Hakaioalani 3873(Hakaiolani 3933 10822

Hawaii 1115 8539 8580Honu 10928Hoopau 3731 3873 4283 4293 4333 6989 989SHoopoe 3699 3936 4293Kahlwahiwa 4291 8443 10822Kaholuanui 4271Kahoolai 4298Kahue 4329Kalimakui 3699-B 8580Kamamai 4325 4343 4345Kamauoho 3933 3697 3936 3945 4345 10619

(Mauoha 4271Kamoho 3859 3859Kamohua 3945 3945Kane 4297 10763 10763Kaneipu 4270 4272 430~Kaohu 3936 3731 3807 4283 10619Kaokua 3699Kiniakua 3697 4269Koaa 3859Koua 3696Kouka 10748K~hea 4514M ·ole 3789-B 3859 3933Maikaiki 4333Maio 4334Owaha 3699Paiaolulu 4326 9895Puou 4061

117

APPENDIX FLA'IE CLAIMANTS REGISTERING ONLY CLAIMS

Table 12. La'ie Claimants Registering Only Claims

L.c. # NAME NATIVE REGISTERVolume Page

3860 Palii 4 2073999 Hikiau 4 179

118

APPENDIX GPRE-1848 'AINA CULTIVATORS OF LA'IE

Table 13. Pre-1848 'Aina Cultivators of Ui'ie

NAME IN LAND COMMISSION CLAIMAlewahine 8439Hopae 3873H0/:iuni 8580Ka ·aele 3774Kaioe 2739a

Kalakee 4343Kaloana 3807 4329 4333 4338 8439

(Kaloaana 10763Kalimanui 3774 4329Kaluaiewa 3873Kamauoha 3945 4345Kanaikaua 4061 4333

(Kanaikawa 3743Kauwaiawa 4003Kawaikole 8580Kawahana 4338Kaweohana 3945Kokalimakahi 4342Ku 3870Kaa. 8580Kuhapa 3870Kui- 8580Kumuhahau 10822Kualonoehu 4338Nahulu 2739Napaiki 8580Pahurnoo 3945

a Kaioe appears in this list because Pia's testimony located in the Buke Hoike , volume ten page sixty,states Kaioe cultivated 'iiina in Lii'ie about 1847.

119

APPENDIX HOBJECTIONS AND 'AINA ALIENATION

Table 14. Objections and 'Aina Alienation Between Testimonies and Awards

L.c.A.# NAME OBJECTION ALIENATED 'AINA

238-E Pakuolu N/A N/A2739 Pia Specific 1 lo'i-cultivated3696 Mahunalii Blanket 1 kula-cultivated

3697(3709) Mahoe Blanket 1 kula-uncultivated3699 Mahakea 1 kula-cultivated

3699-B Kainoahou3708 Moanauli 1 kula-uncultivated3714 Maii3729 Eku Specific3731 Ihupuu3741 Waha3743 Wi Blanket 1 kula, 2 10'i-cultivated3773 Amaka3774 Alaala Specific 1 kula-uncultivated3789 Opala Specific 1 lo'i-uncultivated3807 Laielohelohe 1 kula-cultivated3859 Pahumoa3861 Pulehu3864 Paiakea 3 lo'i-cultivated3873 Paakahi 1 kula-uncultivated3933 Napaeko (gained 1 lo'i)3936 Nakahili Blanket3939 Nahe1ehele3945 Napahu Blanket 1 kula-cultivated4003 Hano Blanket4039 Kalawaiaholona4061 Kuku 1 kula, 1 lo'i-uncultivated4269 Kala Blanket 1 kula-uncultivated4270 Keao Blanket 1 kula, 1 lo'i-cultivated4271 Kaleo 1 kula, 210'i, 1 pahale-cultivated4272 Koi4280 Kauhane 1 kula-uncultivated4281 Kaunahi 1 kula-uncultivated4283 Koula Blanket

120

Table 14. (Continued) Objections and 'Aina Alienation Between Testimonies and Awards

L.c.A.# NAME OBJECTION ALIENATED 'AINA

4286 Kanehoa Specific 1 kula-uncultivated4288 Kaonohi Blanket4290 Kaiolohia Blanket 1 kula-uncultivated4291 Kapule Blanket4293 Keawe Blanket4297 Kapuaokahala4298 Kaualewa Blanket4300 Waikupulani Blanket 1 kula-uncultivated4301 Kanakanui 1 kula, 41o'i-cultivated4302 Kauaikaua 1 kula, Ilo'i-cultivated4325 Kahoale Blanket4326 Koalaukanu Blanket4329 Kalua Blanket4331 Kamano Blanket4333 Kahoukua Blanket 1 kula-cultivated4334 Kalou Blanket 1 kula-uncultivated4336 Kekui Blanket4338 Kahalelaau Blanket 1 kula-uncultivated4342 Kapuaokahala4343 Kauaiomano Blanket 5Io'i-uncultivated4345 Kaumiumi Blanket 1 kula-uncultivated4361 Kii4451 Kuapuu Blanket4514 Pupuka Blanket Ilo'i-cultivated6989 Kahuailua Blanket8533 Kakau8440 Kamamae Blanket 1 kula-cultivated8443 Kaukalekua Blanket 1 kula-cultivated

8559-B Lunalilo, Wm. C.8580 Keliiwaiwaiole 2Io'i-cultivated

8580-B Palii 2Io'i-cultivated8580-C Kuanonoehu

9894 Nawai Blanket 2lo'i-uncultivated10619 Poouahi Blanket10748 Puhipaka 1 pahale-cultivated10763 Puni Blanket 1 kula-uncultivated10822 Peka lI2Io'i, 2 kula, 1 pahale-cultivated10928 Ulukou Blanket

121

APPENDIX IINDICES OF AWARDS FOR LA'IE

Table 15. Indices ofAwards for Ui'ie

N.. 1It~..L_llefl A_.... L Co A. ~_ II. ~, ~a.. A...

~ .......'''-.-.~.~._'-=-=_..'-'-===.. =._=..._=.===.=_•._. __.~-"'..,~-=_._-= '-'.-=-=..=.= .....=--"-=-,,,..=...= =..- '-'""'-'.-=.=."-'--=.. <:'-'=='-,~.~~ ...

...ic --·-:;A;UIaa~Ia:---------;i'n:l;--.L~A1~.:..-.=--=~--.-- ,_~,....,..._Laic 3174 6 J65 93Z .. 523 O.liO Ac -'--'-' ...._ .....,Laic ~":"a 3773 6 367 918 .. ..95 2.10 Acl 6taic HaJKI ::: J(i4JM """- "- ...... 025 Ac ILaie Ibupuu 3731 6 J71 1444 5 oJ63 0.92 Ac 3LLaie~·~-----:Kahaii;i~I~ClUi;;;;u-----~~~~--~~~~3508~- 15 24'1 1.66 Aca 5...ie Ka'-le "flA 6 359 9<lD 4 499 0.95 Ac ..- 2Laie Kahoukua 4 5 6 358 IJ04 5 183 125 .-\CI 1, _.. 4J33 6 342 925 .. 509 1.21 A...- Kahuailua 6!il8!I 6 370 930 CI .\LaIc Kai-OOU'.cnn .. 519 0.64 Ac 3T:Lai~.e;-----~Ka~iolohia:;::;::;:.=- .::~~~B~8!!.......-~?!5 7430 27 615 1.S74AC:ILaic Kala 4290 6 37-1-3008 --13499 1.40 Aa ._--. JJ . ..Z69 6 373 9'.... .. 515 O."~ Ac ..~;: KalawUaholona 4O.J9 6 347 ....:: .... 0.52 Ac 2Laie ~:: 4211 6 376 J387 I.J 567 1.<lD Ao 2LLai;Ic;------Kail51ua;;;-------~43~34~~6~. 3M 924 .. S01 0.65 Ac 1Laie 1Cana_ 4J29 6 • 345 931 ".. -'52i I.04Ac.-·-·----..-~1

Lail! Kunano :m ~ ~ = .W 157 0.74 Ac 2I" 5!i9 0.62 Ac .1KOOLAULOA. OAHU----------_._--------_-:..._------_._.__._._---_...... -.

LAIB:----_._--------_._---_._--_._._----_ ..Laie Kanakanui 4301 6 529 2'116 13 295 2.72 ACILaie Kanehoa 42116 9 3fJ) .••• 0.48 Acl..ic Kaonohi 4Z88 7 295 .._ 0.5 Acl.aie Kaonohi 4288 6 355 . _ 0.057 AtJ.aic ... Kapuaokahala _ 4297 6 359 .~~__5__4f! 0.47 AI:Laic Kapuaolcahala 4J42 6 ·373 3S09 15 253 1.40 AcsJ.a~ Kapulc 4291 6 J44 3J89 14 571 1.14 AcaLaic Kapulc for Waikupulllni 4300 4 678 30'-* 13 (I/'I 0.98 AcJ.aic Kauaibua 4302 6 J68 1300 5 175 1.Z3 ACILaic KallaiomanO 43..3 6 347 1305 5 18.~ 0.33 Ac.._-._.Laie Kaualcwa 4298 6 341 _..,_ .... 0.60 AcLaic KllulWeklia lI44J 6 362 921 4 SOl 1.80 ACIT.aic Ka"bane ..280 6 362 _...... .... ...... 0.28 AcLaic Kaulniumi 4345 6 353 3413 14 619 0.43 Ac'.aie Kaunahi 4281 6 357 7614 28 3l!9 0.55 AcLaic _ ..--- Kcaliiwai"'..i~..·---··--- 8580 {: {~6539--24-449 6.19Au

l.aie KeiIO 4270 6 366 1302 5 179 2.33 Aul.a~ Kcawc 4293 6 ~ 2915 13 29J U9Ac.sJ.aie Kelmi 4336 6 653 1298 5 171 I.29Aal.aie ·-----Kif--------.. ·--·..----;4-=-J6:..:1'---6---·jro---u97--·S -- 169 0.99 Acl.aic Koalaulcanu 4326 6 J66 ........ .... ...... 1.13 ACILaic Koi 4272 6 340 2917 13 297 1.587 AcsLaic! Knllia 4283 6 3S6 923 4 S05 1.30 ACI---.-._--===-=--=---_.- '_"-"-LaIc Kuahuia J991J-B 6 3tiO ....._. .... 0.25 AcLaie Kuanonochu 8Sl1l-C 6 S85 1307 5 189 8 ACIl.aie Kuapll\l 445I 6 377 ........ .... ...... 0.72 Ac

4I1I333442

3.\I228

7.,.\.,._._._0 ...._3S33... -_.__.~-- --I

t4

Looie Xuku 4061 6 360 3010 13 S03 0.91 A..- SLaic LaidoheIohe 311)7 6 376 929 4 517 1.07 Au 3Laic T.uualilo, Wm. C. 8559-0 10 488 7494 25 223 6194Acs 2Laic Mahakea 3699 6 352 9Z! 4 513 2.43 ACI 5Laie Mahoe IJ697 6 J69 6481 24 333 O.RSAc 3

3709

Laic Mahunalii 3696 6 342 926 4 511 O.79Ac 2Laie Maii .\114 6 347-;l1 922 4 SO.\ 1.60 Au 4Laic Moanauli 3708 6 3S8 1296 5 167 0.53Ac I"'ie Nahclehele 3939 6 355 1301 5 177 2.60Aa 3Laic Napahu 3945 6 J44 1306 5 187 O.48Ac 3- .. -- - ~

122

Table 15. (continued) Indices ofAwards for Ui'ie

Laic Nabhili 3936{~ {~ I:: 13 SOl 2.60Aa

201 447Laic Na~cko 3933 fi 439 1533 5 643 0.75Ac 5Lnie Nawu 9894 6 361

6534...... 0.45Ac 3

Laic Opala for Kalimakuhi 3789 6 ·351 24 4390.155Ac 2

Laie Pulcahi 3873 6 J45 1.22Aci 4l.nic Pahlunoa 38S9 6 354 5068 20 363 0.78Ac 2[.aic Paiam 3864 6 652 .._.• O.SOAc 2r.. ic rakola 2J8.E 4 420 3094 13 671 lAc 2[.aic Palii 85lI).B 6 441 1299 5 173 1.46Aa .1---_._...•_-_.__._--_. .._--_._._-_._,-"-_.. --"'-'---" _._"." ........ _._---Laic Pelc. 108Z2 6 652 6521 24 413 0.14Ac 4Laic "i. 27:¥) 6 361 ...... 0.25 Ac 1l.aic l'clOuRhi 10611) 6 761 »)7 13 611 1.8AClC ILaic l'\lhibak.. 10748 6 375 ...... 0.74Ac 4.._-----------.-- .. ,----_.--------Lai, [>ulehu .Wil 6 363 2048 8 471 1.l9Aa 3l.aie Puni 10763 6 374 1445 5 4650.67 Ac 3I..ic PUl'IIka 4514 6 440 919 4 4912.09Ac' 7

KOOLAULOA, OAHUM ,

L_t1.it A.a_ L C. A...... ~a.. II. ,. a••1c ,... .Are. , .._~_~.=.._....=~__,#""".,.,_=-._.....__= ':C:"~~=== •• a.= ~~:;'::':.::-:.~~.~:_- .~_-=-=;,==_==

LAI:I ."_._--- ._-_..10928 6 358 {13 $673 I.IU An 3

13 14976 5 181 U5 AcI 4

• 13 S05 1.09Aa ..l.-ic

--_._...._--:-:::-.,..----------:-=:=---:-----::-:=-~l..ai. Ulakou

Waha

Source: Territory of Hawaii, Office of the Commissioner of Public Lands, Indices of Awards Made by the

Board of Commissioners to Ouiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands (Honolulu: Star-Bulletin Press,1929), 793-796.

123

- ---_.---------=- .-_"'~~~',." ,

---'lL"77/ ,;.;rt ,",~~p~

'~~~'~J

.~/pr~".z-:-?' '~7/

~',z~~~~~---·~~u--;~O-=~?",~~-~~-. __'-~.~_-~_~ --== _,>, ,

-:::tC'l......

'"

..,f0\000\

<cJ...i.-cd~cdZC'i

~OJ)

u:

(

.~.

.----:-,'.-

'::"

~,

; '.

..-,.. ...

II

~:r-~ ",~'~.. \.'~.~ ----- \--

, '

. \. G, -- ,

",""l,' "".,~, .....~?' '. -z:~_______ ""IIIlly-, #/ . .' ", .cY)f# -'~ "-~"IV "7

'}' 7"~"" -v~"'7 ··~~'/"'·"U;7 . ~r:.y " ''YjY'" "0/''''/ '~A '''~ ·"'?'""r .:~~.' '~!lIr.'.' '"'7.r ..oy ..../.j'/,y./' 'Y''}''''' ",y ""/,ur~~/" .r-" ......nv-?}' .. v'~ ·7-7 7 "'''1' ",.•.,. ".,-'/~ ~'''7.. II '"'rr ""!j" , /".:/,.

',-V~.f) !/."."V.,..~)', '?~;Y"""7 v "'Y"./.l.f/""j:I'· v ''Y''':/L" ....,-j/,..,..",. ...."Y......,/.rf/.,~..,jl"u... ...,.O/~ roO""'?/' ~ "V "''J?'" -"'7##"':}' ,77 7' v._ ~Y"'''fJ7? '''V'-Y''.y~~ .......,. ':;'~.b " f

.no),p ~#~r--;Y ," .....,r/,~ .~ rJ. ""/./"""7 J' .• -.,.. ,yol?."'7':/:.:.l'/f)"......~V"';n.¥ 7 " -".. ,?T··'Y·-;PI/..,-,h--,r ""'"Pr:A: 7' • '0/'" .·.r··~I"--?''/~·~' ·71'b 7 .. .,.'r ..,....//u:'::f".eu;i" '-".'-;?? .... ""J:#'" 7)7 7 ...HI- ..,..., ....,."'7' ",7- '-7"'/ .?/ /'P'~

,,~v;;'-:~r~;I~r_7')~: . ':'" >~"i. ;,.:,2.';;"!:/!7;'~G.tnl._"?'JE.,

-.:t

=-00

=--~ .>«~.Q~z~

~oo~~~~

«~<z

APPENDIX KANALYSIS OF THE LA'IE TAX MAPS

Identifying the location of the 'apana in La'ie is impossible as neither A. F.

Turner's field book nor the Land Commission Awards contain a starting point to fix the

location of the' apana within the ahupua' a. However, most of the awards identify their

surrounding' apana. Therefore, the relative position of adjoining'apana on the 1931 tax

map and subsequent tax maps will be checked to determine if they correspond to the

original awards. This analysis will rely upon the tax maps for the location of the' apana

within the ahupua'a. Where discrepancies exist between the 1931 map and subsequent tax

maps, the placement of an 'apana will be determined from the Land Commission Awards.

Analysis of Tax Maps

The size of the 1931 map, 11.5' by 3.5', and the number of subsequent tax maps

used in this analysis make showing each of them within this text impractical. Therefore, a

condensed table identifying the historical placement of each 'apana accompanies the 1996

tax maps which are used to show the location of the'apana.I Since the 1931 map is not

divided into sections, La'ie will be analyzed according to the seventeen areas shown in

Figure 3.

1 TRW REDI, Realty Atlas: State of Hawaii, First Tax Division, City and County ofHonolulu, map

vol. Zones 5-8, 30th ed. (Anaheim: TRW RED!, 1996), 1755-1772.The dates at the top of the tables are the cancellation date for each tax map.Hawai'i, Department of Taxation, Tax Maps Branch (lst Division), Canceled Tax Map Prints (1932

6/30/1969), Box 21 (Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, n.d.), microfilm 105.Hawai'i, Department of Taxation, Tax Maps Branch (lst Division), Canceled Tax Map Prints, Box 31

(Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1974), microfilm 105.Hawai'i, Department of Taxation, Tax Maps Branch (lst Division), Canceled Tax Map Prints, Box 38

(Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1980), microfilm 105.

125

-tv0\

.,0

~

~..~ -0

--<?

v

.5 c A

\\\

\~t

v

..s.

0"

Figure 3. Ui'ie's seventeen tax maps.

Neither the 1931 map nor subsequent tax maps show any 'apana in maps 2, 3, 10, II, 12,

14,15, nor 16.2 The remaining maps 1,4,5,6,7,8,9,12,13, and 17 will each be

analyzed individually as they all contain 'apana.

Map 1

The 1931 map showed twelve 'apana in Map I (Figure 4). Table 16 shows that

subsequent maps added three more 'apana and maintained all of the 1931 map's 'apana

except Koi's L.c.A. 4272.2. The removal of Koi's 'apana is incorrect as Liber 254 page

191 at the Bureau of Conveyances states this 'apana exists in La' ie Malo' 0 along the

government road.3 This location corresponds to the 1931 map's position ofthis 'apana

and as such is placed at position 8 in Figure 4.

Of the fifteen 'apana appearing on the subsequent editions of Map I, the Land

Commission Awards verified the relative position of eight. In verifying these positions,

another 'apana, Mahakea's L.c.A. 3699.5, was identified as belonging in Map 1. The

exact location of Mahakea's 'apana could not be determined from the awards as his 'apana

shows it east of Waha's L.c.A. 3741.4 and Waha's award shows it to the north.

Although the testimonies provide no further information, A. F. Turner's field book has

Mahakea's 'apana to the north of Waha's 'apana. Therefore, Mahakea's 3699.5 appears at

position 2 in Figure 4. Besides identifying the location of this 'apana, Turner's field book

also identifies that Paiakea's L.c.A. 3864.2 exists just northeast of Mahakea's 'apana five

at position 6. Turner's book also confirms that Kapuaokahala's L.c.A. 4297.3 exists to

the southwest of Koi's L.c.A. 4272.3 at position 9. Turner's verification of these three

'apana brings the total number of 'apana in Map I to eighteen.

2 Appendix L on page 153 lists the maps checked for maps that do not contain an 'apana.

3 Hawai'i, Bureau of Conveyances, "Latter Day Saint Ch. of Jesus Christ by atty of Tr. Tr. to Paina

Nuholo, Deed"Liber 254 30 December 1903): 191.

127

Table 16. Historical Record ofthe 'Apana in Tax Map 1 ofUi'ie

MAP 1L.C.A. No. 1931 Jun-41 Ma -48 Feb-54 Jul-69 Mar-77 19963699.4 1 X X X X

3699.5 23714.3 3 X X X X X X X3741.3 4 X X X X X X X

3741.4 5 X X X X X X X3864.2 63939.3 7 X X X X X X X4272.2 8 X4272.3 9 X X X X X X X4281.1 10 X X X X X X X4286.1 11 X X X X X4297.3 124301.4 13 X X X X X4329.3 14 X X X X X X X4331.3 15 X X X X X X X4342.1 16 X X X X

10748.4 17 X X X X X X X10763.2 18 X X X X X X X

Note: Bold means the Land Commission Awards verified the relative position of the 'apana.

128

_~.....,~# A f<.• ,.."' .." J . ..s~·V~~._".. ",.k,,,. r-I:""'-_.-.e "' ,.. . y~ ~

~_. s;.,e.u,,~"~ CO?"· . Ao4'C

(J"""."I ",t "'~rc./ .,~:N_..... ~ A. II(,.__*€,,."'• .'~' -'/.J.~., ~ K_.."."c"""'· '/a

C_....... I .,.r J6r..~"._ J' u~:i:~":~ :'U;-':;::':;"!~~·:..il~~~'r.~_ .. y ....... ,.~. 1.1"" ·,4 .._~

~& ~ .."'"( • ...··f•.'I.et/,,. '"' bVI'~'.raJ Tht.,I· 'I. If,_" ...~i' 1./";.,,.1.. f',.. .... ,..y..

Figure 4. 'Apana in Annotated Tax Map 1 of Ui'ie.

129

O($"

s

11 in.=260 ft.1

Map 4

The 1931 map showed five 'apana in Map 4 (Figure 5). Table 17 shows that

subsequent maps maintained these awards and made no additions to them. The Land

Commission Awards verified the relative position of all five of these' apana.

Table 17. Historical Record of the 'Apana in Tax Map 4 of La'ie

MAP 4L.C.A.

238-E.23699-B.2

4514.24514.78580.4

No.12345

1931xXXXX

Jun-41XXXXX

Jan-61XXXXX

Jul-77XXXXX

1996XXXXX

Note: Bold means the Land Commission Awards verified the relative position of the'apana.

N

/KOQl.AULO". OAHU

A

LAHIHVLI

@IIIII

(r.I"~ ~

III~

ItIII,1.. "... :

r4'T~

1 in.=133 ft.

Figure 5. 'Apana in Annotated Tax Map 4 of La'ie.

130

Map 5

The 1931 map showed fourteen 'apana in Map 5 (Figure 6). Table 18 shows that

subsequent maps added three more 'apana and maintained all of the 1931 'apana, except

Wi's L.c.A. 3743.3 which was changed to Wi's L.C.A. 3743.2. This change is incorrect

as all the maps show Wi's L.c.A. 3743.2 in Map 8 where surrounding 'apana verify its

position. Of the seventeen 'apana on this map, the Land Commission Awards verified the

relative position of eleven.


Ma 5L.C.A. No. 1931 Jun-41 Feb-44 Mar-57 Mar-72 Jul-77 19963696.2 1 X X X X X X X3697.3 2 X X X X X X X3743.3 3 X 3743.2 3743.2 3743.2 3743.2 3743.23789.2 4 X X X X X X

3789.3 5 X X X X X X X3861.2 6 X X X X X X X3861.3 7 X X X X X X X4003.3 8 X X X X X X X4298.2 9 X X X X X4298.3 10 X X X X X4302.4 11 X X X X X X X4326.3 12 X X X X X X X4343.2 13 X X X X X X X4361.2 14 X X X X X X X4361.3 15 X X X X X X8443.3 16 X X X X X X X8580.6 17 X X X X X X X


131

4v

c·

II',•..

11 in.=I,080ft.17

Figure 6. 'Apana in Annotated Tax Map 5 ofUi'ie.

132

Map 6

The 1931 map showed seven 'apana in Map 6 (Figure 7). Table 19 shows that

subsequent maps added five more 'apana and changed Kahoukua's L.C.A. 4333.3 to

L.C.A. 4383.3. The Land Commission records show that L.C.A. 4383.3 was never

awarded so Kahoukua's L.C.A. 4333.3 was placed at the disputed position. Table 19 also

shows that subsequent maps switched the positions of Koula's L.C.A. 4283.2 and

Ihupuu's L.c.A. 3731.4. Both Koula's and Ihupuu's awards show the other person's

'apana to the north of their own, but their testimonies state the Ihupuu's 'apana resides

south of Koula's 'apana. A. F. Turner's field book confirms the testimonies' position of

these 'apana. Turner's book also shows that Ihupuu's L.c.A. 3731.5 belongs at position

7. Further analysis of the awards and testimonies in Map 6 revealed that Nakahili' s L.c.A.

3936.5 adjoins Amaka's L.c.A. 3773.5. The addition of these 'apana brings the total

number of 'apana in Map 6 to thirteen. The fourteenth 'apana, Kapuaokahala's L.c.A.

4342.3, has appeared in Map 6 at position A since December 1941. This 'apana is

removed from this map as evidence in its testimony suggests that it exists in Malaekahana.

Table 19. Historical Record ofthe 'Apana in Tax Map 6 of La'ie

MAP 6L.C.A. No. 1931 Jun-4l Dec-41 Aug-42 Mar-57 Aug-77 19964270.5 1 X X X X X4270.6 2 X X X X X4270.7 3 X X X X X X X4333.2 4 X X X X X X X4333.3 5 X X X X 4383.3 4383.3 4383.34342.3 A X X X X X

Jun-41 Feb-44 Mar-57 Mar-72 19963731.4 6 4283.2 X X X X X3731.5 73773.5 8 X X X X X X3773.6 9 X X X X3936.5 104270.1 11 X X X X X X4283.2 12 3731.4 X X X X X

10928.2 13 X X X X

Note: Bold means the Land Commission Awards verified the relative position of the \ipana.

133

o

"""l"-II.e::·4 .-

~ -,••~..

'"I :.~

lI~

.....J

..~ ~\0I c..

~ ~J 'I

~111 Ii

~

,E-o•"0~

Z

..-~..-J0§

\,;

<t:c.-0.:

r--:~::son.-U.

134

Map 7 Note

Map 7 will be analyzed last as it contains a list of "unlocated kuleana" some of

which were located in other maps.

Map 8

The 1931 map showed 117 'apana in Map 8 (Figure 8) making it the most densely

cultivated 'aina in all of La'ie.4 Table 20 shows that subsequent maps added L.c.A.

3873.1 and L.c.A. 4514.1 and removed six 'apana. The awards verified that three of the

removed 'apana exist on other maps, but that L.c.A. 3731.2 and L.c.A. 6989.1 exist in

this map at their 1931 positions. The final 'apana removed from this map, L.c.A. 3956.5,

belongs to Naholoaa, who claimed 'aina in Kaaawa, but withdrew his claim in order to live

under the konohiki.5 As such, the 'apana at position 40 is not Naholoaa's L.c.A. 3956,

but rather Nakahili's L.C.A. 3936.7 according to the 'apana surrounding position 40.

Subsequent maps, besides making these alterations, changed five' apana and

modified three others by adding or removing the 'apana number. The Land Commission

Awards verified that all of these changes and modifications were correct, except for the

change of Naepako's L.c.A. 3933.1 to L.c.A. 3933. After these corrections, the total

number of 'apana in Map 8 stands at 116 with the relative position of 112 of these' apana

being verified by the Land Commission Awards.

In verifying the positions of these 'apana, L.c.A. 3933.4, L.C.A. 4297.2, L.C.A.

4302.3 and L.c.A. 4514.6 were identified as existing in Map 8. To illustrate, Naepako's

L.c.A. 3933 shows a stream running along the northern border of its 'apana four and

Hano's L.C.A. 4003.2 also has a stream running along its northern border. In addition,

Hano's 4003.2 shows an 'apana of Naepako to the east at position 35.

4 Although 121 'apana appear in Map 8, Figure 8 and Table 20 contain only information for those

'apana discussed within this section. A full historical record and location of all 'apana in Map 8 is in Table21 which follows Figure 8.

5 Kingdom of Hawai'i, Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles, Foreign Testimony, vol. 11

(February 1846-September 1848; reprint, Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1964),328.

135

Kapuaokahala's L.c.A. 4297 award shows that his 'apana two adjoins the 'apana

of Kaleo and Amaka while their awards show that Kapuaokahala's 'apana adjoins their

'apana. As such, Kapuaokahala's L.c.A. 4297.2 was placed at position 68 on the map.

Next, Kauaikaua's L.c.A. 4302 award shows that his 'apana three adjoins an

'apana of Kaleo. Kaleo's award does not verify this position, but his testimony states that

an 'apana of Kauaikaua borders the makai side of his 'apana. Therefore, Kauaikaua' s

L.c.A. 4302.3 was placed at position 75 on the map.

The last 'apana found from the Land Commission Awards in Map 8 is Pupuka's

L.C.A 4514.6. This 'apana is surrounded by the 'apana of Kuku, Paakahi, and Moanauli

whose awards show that their respective 'apana adjoin L.C.A 4514.6 at position 97 on the

map.

A. F. Turner's field book identifies one more 'apana in Map 8 Kainoahou's 3699

B.3.6 This 'apana, according to Turner, adjoins Kainoahou's 3699-B.l on the Hau'ula

side. The addition of these five' apana brings the total number of 'apana in Map 8 to 121

of which the Land Commission Awards and A. F. Turner's field book verified the relative

position of 117.

The relative position of the majority of 'apana on the 1931 map and subsequent

maps correspond to each. However, a greater amount of variance in the relative position of

'apana exists between the editions of Map 8 than any other map. This variance most likely

arises from the large number of 'apana in Map 8 and from the possibility that A. F. Turner

"doctored" his surveys so that they would "fit together well."7

6 A. F. Turner, "A. F. Turner's Field Book No.4 Laie," (Honolulu: Survey Division, 1851), n.p.

7 Arthur Chambers Alexander, "Land Titles and Surveys in Hawaii," in Hawaiian Planters Record(August, 1920), 77.

136

Table 20. Historical Record of the 'Apana in Tax Map 8 ofUi'ie

Ma 8L.C.A. No. 1931 Dec-41 Mar-58 1996

3699-B.3 93731.2 14 X X3773.6 Map 6 No.8 X X3774.1 23 3774 3774 X X3873.1 29 X X3933.1 32 X X 3933 39333933.3 34 10748.2 10748.2 3938.3 3938.33933.4 353936.4 39 3936.1 3936.1 X X3936.7 40 3956.5 3956.54061.4 52 4061 4061 X X4270.2 54 3774.2 3774.2 X X4297.2 684302.3 754514.1 94 X X4514.6 976989.1 98 X X8355.3 100 8335.3 8335.3 X X8580.5 106 8580.1 8580.1 8580.1 8580.110748.2 114 3938.3 3938.3 X X10763.3 Map 7 No.5 X X10928.2 Ma 6 No. 12 X X


137

-w00

~ ...

.I11.lrDDl.lVll1t11

IN~I.Ar Dr

'L", Dr

~~t:I'

II in.=85 ft.1

Figure 8. 'Apana in Annotated Tax Map 8 of La'ie.

Table 21. Full Historical Record of the 'Apana in Tax Map ofUi'ie

MAPSL.C.A. No. 1931 Dec-41 Mar-58 1996

238-E.l 1 X X X X3696.1 2 X X X X3697.1 3 X X X X3697.2 4 X X X X3699.1 5 X X X X3699.2 6 X X X X3699.3 7 X X X X

3699-B .1 8 X X X X3699-B.3 9

3708.1 10 X X X X3714.1 11 X X X X3714.2 12 X X X X3731.1 13 X X X X3731.2 14 X X3731.3 15 X X X X3741.2 16 X X X X3743.1 17 X X X X3743.2 18 X X X X3773.1 19 X X X X3773.2 20 X X X X3773.3 21 X X X X3773.4 22 X X X X3773.6 Map 6 No. 8 X X3774.1 23 3774 3774 X X3807.1 24 X X X X3807.2 25 X X X X3859.1 26 X X X X3861.1 27 X X X X3864.1 28 X X X X3873.1 29 X X3873.2 30 X X X X3873.3 31 X X X X3933.1 32 X X 3933 39333933.2 33 X X X X3933.3 34 10748.2 10748.2 3938.3 3938.33933.4 353936.1 36 X X X X3936.2 37 X X X X3936.3 38 X X X X3936.4 39 3936.1 3936.1 X X3936.7 40 3956.5 3956.53939.1 41 X X X X3939.2 42 X X X X

139

Table 21. (Continued) Full Historical Record of the 'Apana in Tax Map ofUi'ie

MAP 8L.C.A. No. 1931 Dec-41 Mar-58 1996

3945.1 43 X X X X3945.2 44 X X X X4003.1 45 X X X X4003.2 46 X X X X4039.1 47 X X X X4039.2 48 X X X X4061.1 49 X X X X4061.2 50 X X X X4061.3 51 X X X X4061.4 52 4061 4061 X X4269.1 53 X X X X4270.2 54 3774.2 3774.2 X X4270.3 55 X X X X4270.4 56 X X X X4271.1 57 X X X X4271.2 58 X X X X4271.3 59 X X X X4272.1 60 X X X X4280.1 61 X X X X4283.1 62 X X X X4288.1 63 X X X X4290.1 64 X X X X4291.1 65 X X X X4293.1 66 X X X X4297.1 67 X X X X4297.2 684298.1 69 X X X X4300.1 70 X X X X4301.1 71 X X X X4301.2 72 X X X X4302.1 73 X X X X4302.2 74 X X X X4302.3 754325.1 76 X X X X4326.1 77 X X X X4326.2 78 X X X X4329.1 79 X X X X4329.2 80 X X X X4331.1 81 X X X X4333.1 82 X X X4334.1 83 X X X X4334.2 84 X X X X4336.1 85 X X X X

140

Table 21. (Continued) Full Historical Record of the 'Apana in Tax Map ofUi'ie

MAP 8L.C.A. No. 1931 Dec-41 Mar-58 19964338.1 86 X X X X4338.2 87 X X X X4343.1 88 X X X4345.1 89 X X X X4361.1 90 X X X X4451.1 91 X X X X4451.2 92 X X X X4451.3 93 X X X X4514.1 94 X X4514.4 95 X X X X4514.5 96 X X X X4514.6 976989.1 98 X X6989.2 99 X X X X8355.3 100 8335.3 8335.3 X X8440.1 101 X X X X8443.1 102 X X X X8443.2 103 X X X X8580.2 104 X X X X8580.3 105 X X X X8580.5 106 8580.1 8580.1 8580.1 8580.1

8580-B.1 107 X X X X8580-B.2 108 X X X X8580-B.3 109 X X X X8580-C.l 110 X X X X9894.1 111 X X X X10619.1 112 X X X X10748.1 113 X X X X10748.2 114 3938.3 3938.3 X X10748.3 115 X X X X10763.1 116 X X X X10763.3 Map 7 No.5 X X

10822.1 117 X X X X10822.2 118 X X X X10822.3 119 X X X X10822.4 120 X X X X10928.1 121 X X X X10928.2 Ma 6 No. 1 X X


141

Special Note: A Duplicated 'Apana

Both the 1931 map and subsequent maps placed Keliiwaiwaiole's L.c.A. 8580.1 at

position 104 in Figure 8. In verifying the relative position of this 'apana, Keliiwaiwaiole's

L.C.A. 8580.5 appeared to fit the position better as it adjoined Palii's 8580-B.l and 'apana

one did not show any 'apana surrounding it. This point led to a detailed analysis of 'apana

one and five which revealed that except for minor variations in their angles, length of sides,

and acreage these 'apana appear identical as shown in Figure 9.

L.c.A. 8580.1

Angles:

Sides: 740 pauku160 pauku760 pauku212 pauku

Acres: 1.4

Awarded: Jan. 9, 1852

45.5°40°49°46°

L.c.A. 8580.5

Angles: 46°40°50°46°

Sides: 740 pauku160 pauku760 pauku210 pauku

Acres: 1.36

Awarded: July 12, 1853

Figure 9. Keliiwaiwaiole's duplicated 'apana: L.c.A. 8580.1 and L.C.A. 8580.5.

The minor differences between these 'apana combined with their position and shape

suggests that they are same 'apana. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that L.C.A.

8580.1 was awarded on January 9,1852 with 'apana two while L.c.A. 8580.5 was

awarded with 'apana three through eight a year and half later on July 12, 1853. Taking

these facts into consideration, this text regards L.c.A. 8580.1 and L.C.A. 8580.5 as the

same 'apana which brings the total number of 'apana in La'ie drops to 212.

142

Map 9

The 1931 map showed seven 'apana in Map 9 (Figure 10). Table 22 shows that

subsequent maps added one more 'apana and changed the 1931 map's L.C.A. 3873.4 to

L.c.A. 3936.6. Both of these 'apana are pahale and the Land Commission Awards

verified neither of them at the disputed position. Nevertheless, Nakahili's L.c.A. 3936.3

is shown at position 9 because subsequent maps placed Paakahi's L.c.A. 3873.4 in Map

13 next to the ocean which corresponds to his testimony. The Land Commission Awards

verified the relative position of four of the remaining seven 'apana.


MAP 9L.C.A. No. 1931 Jun-41 Oct-43 Oct-54 Jul-66 Se -76 19963859.2 1 X X X X X X X3936.6 2 3873.4 X X X X X X3945.3 3 X X X X X X X4061.5 4 X X X X X X X4291.3 5 X X X X X X4326.5 6 X X X X X X8580.7 7 X X X X X X X10928.3 8 X X X X X X X

Note: Bold means the Land Commission Awards verified the relative position of the' apana.

143

7"C·

\\I\

~{, I

rt \ilol '9-"'" 1 in.=145 ft.1

,,-,,-

,. _"r----- .,""..... ,,-I ' ....,

I

I,,,II

-

..,.,.


144

Map 13

The 1931 map shows three 'apana in Map 13 (Figure 11). Table 23 shows that

subsequent maps added one more' apana. The Land Commission awards do not verify the

relative position of any of these 'apana.

Table 23. Historical Record ofthe 'Apana in Tax Map 13 of La'ie

MAP 13L.C.A. No. 1931 Nov-40 Jun-54 Jan-60 Au -64 19963714.4 1 X X X X X3807.3 2 X X X X X X3873.4 3 X X X X X4283.3 4 X X X X X X

145

1

''''0. f# 23

"1:1 Vc::c::.~

':t.

4O·4~

~~.

N

73,..,.

.-

1 in.=120 ft.

Figure 11. 'Apana in Annotated Tax Map 13 of Ui'ie.

146

Map 17

The 1931 map shows three 'apana in the Map 17 (Figure 12). Table 24 shows that

subsequent maps added two more 'apana and changed the 1931 map's L.C.A. 3789.5 to

L.C.A.8440.2. Kamamae's 8440.2 appears in Figure 12 since L.C.A. 3789 does not

contain an 'apana five. The awards verified the relative position of two 'apana in this map.

Table 24. Historical Record of the'Apana in Tax Map 17 of La'ie

MAP 17L.C.A. No. 1931 Jun-41 Oct-43 Oct-54 Jul-66 Jun-71 1996

2739.1 1 X X X X X3741.1 2 X X X X X X3743.4 3 X X X X X8440.2 4 3789.5 X X X X X X3933.5 5 X X X 3938.5 3938.5 3938.5 3938.5


147

.,."

N~

!!

IO.GC~J:

L:! ........,

D'I,i

'1

e ••:


148

Map 7

Figure 13 shows that Map 7 consists of the mauka region of La'ie. This area does

not appear on the 1931 map and Table 25 shows that subsequent maps only identify three

'apana in this region: L.c.A. 4326.4, L.C.A. 4331.2, and L.C.A. 10763.3. In addition to

these 'apana, the maps also listed seventeen 'apana as "Unlocated Kuleanas." Dr. Hallett

H. Hamrnatt stated in an archaeological report that "these ['apana] are assumed to be in

Koloa Gulch or possibly the next small valley to the north, Wailele Stream."9 He based

this assumption on the list's position on the map and the existence of taro terraces about

two miles inland along Koloa Stream and 2.5 miles up Wailele Stream. Hammatt never

verified his assumption which a review of the Land Commission records easily disproves.

To illustrate, both Kahuailua's and Kekui's testimonies state that their pahale are located in

Malaekahana. 1O In addition, the relative position check done in this study identified that

L.C.A. 3938.4 and L.C.A. 4302.3 were in Map 8. Finally, this map shows Kamano's

L.C.A. 4331.2, an "unlocated kuleana," in La'ie Wai next to Malaekahana. An analysis of

Kamano's 'apana also reveals that Kalou's L.C.A. 4334.3 and Kanakanui's L.C.A.

4301.3, both "unlocated kuleana," adjoin it. The positive identification of these seven

'apana, none of which reside near Koloa or Wailele streams, disproves Dr. Hammatt's

general assumption. Nevertheless, two of the remaining ten unlocated 'apana, L.c.A.

4281.2 and 4300.2, do exist in the Koloa stream region according to their claim

registrations. However, Koula's L.C.A. 4334.4 exists in La'ie Malo'o near "the great

stone wall" and L.c.A. 3729.1, L.C.A. 4269.2, L.c.A. 4290.4, and L.C.A. 4300.3 exist

makai according to their testimonies.

9 Hallett H. Hammatt, Archaeological Survey of the Lii'ie Sewer Plant with Historical Background onLii'ie Ahupua'a (Honolulu: Cultural Surveys Hawaii, 1991), 13.

10 Hawaiian Kingdom, Foreign Testimony, 291, 308.

149

Table 25. Historical Record of the 'Apana in Tax Map 7 of Ui'ie

Ma 7L.C.A. No. 1931 Jun-41 ? Mar-58 Jan-61 1996

3699-B.3 Map 8 No.9 UL UL UL UL3729.1 UL UL UL UL

3933.4 Map 8 No. 35 UL UL UL UL4269.2 UL UL UL UL4281.2 UL UL UL UL4290.4 UL UL UL UL4300.2 UL UL UL UL4300.3 UL UL UL UL4301.3 1 UL UL UL UL4302.3 Map 8 No. 75 UL UL UL UL4326.4 2 X X X X4331.2 3 X X X X4334.3 4 UL UL UL UL4334.4 UL UL UL UL4336.2 Ma1aekahana UL UL UL UL4336.3 UL UL UL UL4451.4 UL UL UL UL6989.3 MaIaekahana UL UL UL UL10673.3 5 X UL UL UL


150

,... t~!

Ij ~...

ZII

'1

C

~ff \

~

~

~

~)~I ",

.. ~

.., ~

~~

••

,;

~•

....••

~

151

t

,

c::.....

Summary of Analysis

The 1931 map and subsequent maps contained 183 'apana. In addition, thirteen

previously unlocated 'apana were identified and placed on the maps.!! Of these 196

'apana, the Land Commission Awards and A. F. Turner's field book verified the relative

position of 161. The review of the Land Commission Awards also identified that

Keliiwaiwaiole's L.c.A. 8580.1 and L.c.A. 8580.5 are the same 'apana. As such, the

highest possible number of 'apana in La'ie dropped from 213 to 212. Notwithstanding this

success, sixteen 'apana were not located on any map.

11 See Appendix M on page 155 for a list of these previously unlocated' apana.

152

APPENDIX LLA'IE TAX MAPS WITHOUT 'APANA

Table 26. Historical Record of Ui'ie Tax Map 2

Ma 2L.C.A. No.NONE

1931 Jun-41 Jun-54 Jan-60 Jul-77 1996

Table 27. Historical Record ofUi'ie Tax Map 3

Ma 3L.C.A. No.NONE

1931 Nov-40 Jun-54 Jan-60 Jul-77 1996

Table 28. Historical Record of La'ie Tax Map 10

L.C.A.NONE

No. 1931Ma~10

1996


L.c.A. No.NONE

Map 111931 May-49 Nov-73 Mar-76 1996


L.C.A. No.NONE

Map 121931 May-53 Dec-69 1996


L.C.A. No.NONE

Map 141931 Aug-61

153

Aug-64 1996


Ma 15L.C.A. No.NONE

1931 Nov-40 Jun-54 Jan-60 Jul-66 1996


L.C.A. No.NONE

Map 161931 Nov-40 Jun-54

154

Jan-60 1996

Table 34. Location of 'Apana in Ui'ie

L.c.A. # Name Apana (Plat #, Map #)4 5 o

~

o{1

>~~

oz>O:g~trl.. z>I~"'tl~

>~

~~~z~

~I~

trl

8.438.41

8.28

8:-328.29

8--=-36

8.27

8.24S-:-26

Wi

Pia

EkuMaii

8 1 4,117 18 2 5 18 3 8 4 5 28 5 8 6 8 78 8 4~ _8,~

8 108 11 8,12UL

8 13 8 14 8 15 6 6172 8 16 1 4 1 5817 818 53 1738 19 8,20 ~,2l ~2_2..............__.............__8 23

Onala 54 558 25 _13,29 156 _5,L1 6

8 30 8 31 13 38 33 8 34 8 358 37 8 38 _8,3~

8 42 1 78 44 9,3

Walla

AlaaIa

Mahoe

Amaka

Pufehu

IhuDUU

Pakolu

Paiakea

NaDahu

Paakahi

NakahiliNaoaeko

Mahakea

Pahumoa

Moanauli

Mahunalii

Kainoahou

NaheIehele

Laielohelolle

3873

3743

3939

3864

3933

3945

38593861

3936

37413731

3807

3774

3714

3773

3729

3789

3699

3708

27393696

238-E

3699~B

3697/3709

VIVI

Table 34. (Continued) Location of 'Apana in Ui'ie

L.C.A. # Name I 'Apana (Plat #, Map #)1 2 3 4 5

4003 Hano 8.454039 Kalawaiaholona 8.474061 Kuku 8.494269 Kala 8,534270 Keao 6,114271 Kaleo 8.574272 Koi 8.604280 Kauhane 8.614281 Kaunahi 1.104283 Koula 8.624286 Kanehoa 1,114288 Kaonohi 8.63- I 4290 Kaiolohia 8.64 Unlocated

VII 4291 Kaoule 8.65 Unlocated0\

4293 Keawe 8.66 Unlocated4297 Kaouaokaha1a 8.67 8.684298 Kaualewa 8.69 5,94300 Waikupulani 8.70 Unlocated4301 Kanakanui 8.71 8.724302 Kauaikaua 8.73 8.744325 Kahoale 8.764326 Koalaukanu 8.774329 Kalua 8.794331 Kamano 8.814333 Kahoukua 8.82

Table 34. (Continued) Location of 'Apana in Ui'ie

L.C.A. # Name

VI-...J

43344336433843424343434543614451451469898355844TI84438580

8580-B8580-C98941061910748107631082210928

KalouKekui

KahalelaauKaouaokahalaKauaiomanoKaumiumi

KiiKuaouuPuouka

KahuailuaKakau

KamamaeKauhalekua

KeliiwaiwaiolePalii

KuanonoehuNawai

PoouahiPuhioaka

PuniPeka

Ulukou

18.-838.858.861,168.888.898.9U8.91S-.94

2

Note: Bold means the Land Commission Awards verified the relative position of the' apana.

APPENDIX NLA'IE'S PREVIOUSLY UNLOCATED 'APANA

Table 35. Ui'ie's Previously Unlocated 'Apana

L.C.A. Name Map # No.

3699.5 Mahakea 1 23699-B.3 Kainoahou 8 9

3731.5 Ihupuu 6 73864.2 Paiakea 1 63933.4 Napaeko 8 35

3936.5 Nakahili 6 103936.7 Nakahili 8 404297.2 Kapuaokahala 8 684297.3 Kapuaokahala 1 124301.3 Kanakanui 7 14302.3 Kauaikaua 8 754334.3 Kalou 7 44514.6 Pupuka 8 7

158

APPENDIX 0DISCREPANCIES IN LA'IE'S 'APANA ACREAGE

Table 36. Discrepancies in Ui'ie's 'Apana Acreage

L.C.A. # Name Awards Royal Patents Indices of Awards

3714 Maii 1.51 1.6 1.6

3789 Opala 0.65 0.6 0.65

4271 Kaleo 0.57 1.4 1.2

4272 Koi 2.046 1.57 1.587

4290 Kaiolohia 1.38 1.38 1.4

4343 Kauaimano 1.05 0.33 0.33

4514 Pupuka 2.09 1.89 2.09

10748 Puhipaka 0.74275 0.74275 0.74

Total Acreage = 10.03875 9.51275 9.597

159

Table 37. Acreage of 'Apana In Ui'ie

L.C.A. # Name I Total La'ie I 'Apana AcreageAcreage 1 2 3 4 5

238-E Pakolu 1 0.252739 Pia 0.25 0.253696 Mahunalii 0.79 0.54

36973709 Mahoe 0.85 0.353699 Mahakea 2.43 0.81

3699-B Kainoahou 1.574 0.324 >3708 Moanauli 0.53 0.53 (j

3714 Maii 1.51 0.5 ~

3729 Eku 0.25 0.25 ~

>3731 TIm uu 1.66 0.78 ~

3741 Waha 1.35 0.1 ~>

3743 Wi 1.09 0.17 O~~~

...... 3773 Amaka 2.1 0.16 ",~0\ 3774 Alaala 0.6 0.6 >120 ~~

3789 ala 0.65 0.25 >""""3807 Laielohelohe 1.07 0.28 0.54

2~

3859 Pahumoa 0.78 0.53 0.25>~

""""3861 Pulehu 1.19 0.54 0.4 23864 Paiakea 0.5 0.2 0.3 t""3873 Paakahi 1.22 0.34 0.25

>1'"

""""3933 Na aeko 0.75 0.1 0.21 ~

3936 Nakahili 2.6 0.36 0.143939 Nahelehele 2.6 0.13 0.083945 Naoahu 0.48 0.19 0.04

o

o

_D9~

I_.mII_.mII-...DB...

ImBIIBII

Table 37. (Continued) Acreage of 'Apana In Ui'ie

L.c.A. # Name I Total Ui'ie I 'Apana AcreageAcreage 1 2 3 4 5

4003 Hano 0.92 0.45 0.224039 Kalawaiaholona 0.52 0.22 0.34061 Kuku 0.91 0.36 0.164269 Kala 0.76 0.51 0.254270 Keao 2.33 0.25 0.464271 Kaleo 0.57 0.07 0.34272 Koi 2.046 0.36 1.5364280 Kauhane 0.28 0.284281 Kaunahi 0.55 0.254283 Koula 1.3 0.424286 Kanehoa 0.48 0.484288 Kaonohi 0.05 0.054290 Kaiolohia 1.38 0.2 0.67 0.25......

I 4291 Kaoule 1.14 0.3 0.59 0.250\......4293 Keawe 1.69 0.95 0.54 0.24297 Kaouaokahala 0.47 0.2 0.17 0.14298 Kaualewa 0.6 0.15 0.2 0.254300 Waikuoulani 0.98 0.28 0.45 0.254301 Kanakanui 2.453 0.67 0.1 0.0334302 Kauaikaua 1.23 0.23 0.56 0.084325 Kahoale 1.25 1.254326 Koalaukanu 1.13 0.274329 Kalua 1.04 0.664331 Kamano 0.62 0.124333 Kahoukua 1.21 0.38

o

II nana Acreag~

0.023 0.120.25 0.10.17 0.220.21 0.25

Table 37. (Continued) Acreage of 'Apana In Ui'ieL.c.A. # Name I Total Ui'ie -

Acreage U4334 Kalou 0.65 0.14336 Kekui 1.04 0.474338 Kahalelaau 0.95 0.74342 Kaouaokahala 0.25 0.254343 Kauaiomano 1.05 0.84345 Kaumiumi 0.43 0.184361 Kii 0.99 0.374451 Kuaouu 0.72 0.134514 Puouka 2.09 0.546989 Kahuailua 0.39 0.048355 Kakau 0.168440 Kamamae 0.748443 Kauhalekua 1.8

-.. I 8580 Keliiwaiwaiole 4.790\tv 8580-B Palii 1.46 0.65

8580-C Kuanonoehu 8 89894 Nawai 0.1 0.110619 Poouahi 1.8 1.810748 Puhioaka 0.74275 0.110763 Puni 0.67 0.3210822 Peka 0.74 0.1410928 Ulukou 1.1 0.64

Total Ui'ie AcreaQ:e I 84.39575

_APPENDIX QDEED HISTORY OF LA'IE'S LAND COMMISSION AWARDS

Table 38, a deed history ofUi'ie's Land Commission Awards, was developed from

the indices and Libers at the Bureau of Conveyances. The following terms and

abbreviations are used in this table.

Conveyance means the land which transfers from grantee to grantor. Table 38describes this land either by the Land Commission Award or the RoyalPatent number.

Grantor refers to the owner of the land who is conveying his interest or right in theland.

Inst. stands for instrument or mode of conveying interest in the land. The followingtypes of instrument are recorded in Table 38: Deed, Exchange Deed (Ex.Deed), Correction Deed (Cor. Deed), Mortgage (Mortg.), Release ofMortgage (Release), Assignment of Mortgage (AIM), Mortgage Foreclosure(Fore!.), Lease, Release of Dower (Rls. Dwr.), and Foreign Testimony(Test.).

Grantee is the buyer or receiver of the land being conveyed.

Conveyed stands for the date which the land was conveyed from the Grantor to theGrantee.

Recorded stands for the date the instrument, which conveyed interest in the landfrom the grantor to the grantee, was recorded in the Bureau ofConveyances.

Liber is the book in which the instrument is recorded.

Page refers to the page in Liber in which the instrument is recorded.

163

Table. 38 Deed History of Ui'ie's Land Commission Awards

IConveyance Grantor I Inst. I Grantee

238-E (2 'iipana) - 3094 Pakalou

238-E Kupau & Kupuna Lease Sillina & Co. 4-7-1882 6-8-1882 75 106-7

'apana 2 Kupau & Kupuna Ex. Deed H. H. Cluff (Church) 5-25-1882 8-8-1882 75 274

238-E Kapuna (Kupau ) Deed Mahinaeleele 3-3-1886 7-30-1886 98 315

238-E Mahinaeleele Deed Dina Kapahu 7-31-1893 10-25-1893 141 466-7

238-E 1. K. & Emily Smith Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 6-5-1914 7-22-1914 405 298-9

2739 (1 'iipana) - None Pia Test. Kaaulani

3696 (2 'iipana) - 926 Mahunalii2 'apana Kamaunu & Kekulu (Mahunalii ) Deed Kahoino 7-30-1885 7-31-1885 97 127-128

- 3696 Keakaohawaii & H. N. Kamauoha Deed David, Charles, Kauahikaula 9-29-1901 9-18-1901 223 249-500\ & Kaui Kamauoha; Hookano-+:>.

Ahtian, Mrs. Kahili Kamalolo,

& Mrs. Kaeleele Pa

3696 Keakaohawaii & H. N. Kamauoha Deed D. Kamauoha 9-29-1901 9-18-1901 223 449-50

.395 acres ('apana 1 & 2) Mahu Kahoino Deed George Kekauoha 10-24-1905 10-25-1905 277 30

.395 acres ('apanal & 2) George K. Kekauoha and wife Deed J. Lightfoot 1-15-1908 1-16-1908 300 265

.395 acres ('apana 1 & 2) J. Lightfoot Deed F. E. Thompson Tr. 10-9-1908 10-9-1908 311 77

.395 acres ('apana 1 & 2) F. E.Thompson Tr. Deed George Kekauoha 5-21-1913 5-22-1913 390 159

.395 acres ('apana 1 & 2) George & Amia Kekauoha Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 6-8-1915 6-29-1915 420 480

3696 J. & Flora (Keaulana) Abraham Deed J. K. Nakookoo Tr. 5-25-1917 8-1-1917 482 19-20

3696 Sam & Hattie (Keaulana) Noiai Deed J. K. Nakookoo Tr. 5-25-1917 8-1-1917 482 18

3696 J. & Eunice (Kamauoha) Ah Quinn Deed David Kamauoha 6-7-1924 9-3-1924 747 117-8

3696 Eunice (Kamauoha) Ah Quinn Deed David Kamauoha 8-20-1924 2-6-1925 759 377-8

3696 Kauahikaula & Haleola Kamauoha Deed David Kamauoha 2-24-1925 3-5-1925 764 460-1

Table. 38 (continued) Deed History ofUi'ie's Land Commission Awards

I I IConveyance Grantor Inst. Grantee

3697/3709 (3 'apana) 6481 Mahoe

3697 Puakalua, Mamauea, Koolua Deed J. A. Kekuku 4-12-1896 8-22-1919 525 135-6

.25 acre ('apana 2) J. A. & Miriama Kekuku Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 8-6-1902 8-18-1902 241 64-5

'apana 1 & 3 Joseph Kekuku Deed Heber J. Grant (Church) 2-28-1922 4-26-1922 634 136-7

Liber 634, Page 138 Heber J. Grant (Church) Cor. Deed K. Kekuku 6-9-1924 8-2-1924 730 497

3699 (5 'apana) - 927 Mahakea

3699 Lalawalu (Mahakea's Widow ) Deed Kuahine & Lewaina Kaupono 11-21-1884 6-2-1885 96 100-1

3699 Napahu Mahakea Deed Kuahine & Lewaina Kaupono 6-11-1886 6-21-1886 102 110-1

3699 Kuahine Deed Kalakala K. Lua Jr. 10-29-1907 11-5-1907 296 448-9

3699 Kupele & Akana Deed James Kawai 12-20-1918 12-23-1918 510 282-4

-0\3699-B (3 'apana) - 7430 Kainoahou Test. OlaVl

3699-B K. Puahi Deed Wilford Woodruff (Church) 9-27-1897 10-28-1897 172 444

3708 (1 'apana) - 1296 Moanauli

3708 Hanio (Moanauli ) Deed Kenoa 2-3-1902 2-7-1902 234 80

3708 Kaihe Hilo and Mele Deed H. N. Kamauoha 4-8-1902 4-11-1902 231 290

3708 Kenoa Deed Solomona Kahawaii 4-16-1903 4-18-1903 248 322-3

3708 H. N. Kamaouha & Keakaohawaii Deed Solomona Kahawaii 7-24-1903 9-17-1903 250 299-300

and Joseph & Miriama Kekuku

.53 acres ('apanal) Solomona Kahawaii Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 5-31-1905 11-14-1912 382 160

3708 Eliza Shimonishi, Joseph Kahawii, Deed Kipi Kahawaii 2-3-1910 2-12-1910 328 165-7

and Serna & Solomon Jr. Kahawaii

3708 Kipi Kahawaii Deed Opio Kahawaii 8-14-1915 9-4-1915 435 4

Table. 38 (continued) Deed History of La'ie's Land Commission Awards


3714 (4 'apana) - 922 Mali3714 Hookaaku & Kulia or Julia Deed Kapuna & Mahakea 10-27-1880 11-17-1880 64 485

'apana 1 Kupau & Kupuna Ex. Deed H. H. Cluff (Church) 5-25-1882 8-8-1882 75 274

3714 Jonatana Kupau Deed Ioela Kupau 3-10-1886 7-30-1886 98 316-7

3714 Napahu Mahakea Deed Kuahine & Lewaina Kaupono 6-11-1886 6-21-1886 102 110-1

3714 Kaili & Kalawaia (Maii ) Deed Hanale Kalawaia 3-5-1887 2-25-1892 135 152-3

3714 Ioela Kupau Deed K. Kalawaia 3-15-1888 3-19-1888 110 128-9

.5 acre ('apana 1) Kaili & Kalawaia (Maii ) Deed Kaui-koa 4-2-1889 5-19-1890 122 383-4

3714 Hanale Kalawaia Lease C. K. Akana 9-9-1896 2-20-1897 169 215-6

'apana 1 S. K. Kaui Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 5-21-1903 5-25-1903 250 48-9

3714 Kuahine Deed Kalakala K. Lua Jr. 10-29-1907 11-5-1907 296 448-9

- 3714 Kahinu (Kalawaia ) Lease LDS Church 20 years 11-13-1916 10-15-1916 443 3840'1

'apana 4 Kupele & Akana Deed James Kawai 12-20-1918 12-23-1918 510 282-40'1

3729 (1 'apana) - None Eku3729 Kaikuaawa (Eku )

Kaalaapou (Kaikuaawa) Deed Kapuna 7-22-1882 2-9-1884 85 299-300

3731 (5 'apana) - 3508 Ihupuuall 5 'apana Ihupuu Deed Paul F. Manini 10-2-1860 7-3-1862 15 277-8

all 5 'apana Paul F. Manini Deed Henry Howland 7-3-1862 7-3-1862 15 278-9

3731 Henry Howland Deed T. T. Daugherty 7-27-1863 7-27-1863 17 117-8

2.63 acres (all 5 'apana) T. K. Kupukupu and Kaaiai Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 6-29-1905 7-1-1905 272 220



3741 (4 'iipana) ·1303 Waha3741 Lau San Lease Akana 2-10-1882 6-8-1882 75 108-9

3741 Mahakea & Nakapuna Lease Akana 4-1-1882 6-8-1882 75 106-7

3741 Kapuna and Kupau Ex. Deed Harvey H. Cluff (Church) 5-25-1882 8-8-1882 75 274

3741 Kahanupaa and Kauwe (Waha) Deed Rahela Kaniu 7-22-1887 8-4-1887 107 150-1

3743 (4 'iipana) - 3011 Wi (Deceased)3743 Poouahi Deed Josiah K. Waiwaiole & Nahua 11-22-1882 11-30-1882 79 20-1

1.09 acres (all 4 'apana) Josiah K. Waiwaiole and Nahua Mortg. M. M. Scott 10-7-1884 12-4-1884 88 464-5

1.09 acres (all 4 'apana) M.M.Scott Ford. Josiah K. Waiwaiole & Nahua 9-9-1889 9-10-1889 118 261

3743 M. M. Scott Deed Cecil Brown 9-9-1889 9-23-1889 118 310

..... 3743 Cecil Brown Deed William R. Castle 12-11-1889 3-7-1890 122 2120'1

1.09 acres (all 4 'apana) William R. Castle Deed Andrew Adams 3-28-1905 4-4-1905 266 233-5-.....l

1.09 acres (all 4 'apana) Andrew Adams Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 4-13-1905 4-13-1905 266 373-4

3773 (6 'iipana) ·918 Amaka2.10 acres (all 6 'apana) Amaka Deed Kaio 5-24-1866 7-24-1866 21 372

'apana 3 J. W. Kaio (Amaka) Deed Kipi Kahawaii 6-16-1906 6-30-1906 280 316-7

'apana 3 Kipi and Solmona Kahawaii Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 9-14-1906 11-14-1912 382 161-2

'apana 1,2,4,5,6, 1. W. Kaio Deed Papa Kaio 4-2-1909 4-8-1909 316 164-5

'apana 1,2,4,5,6, Papa Kaio Deed Kalakapua 8-23-1916 8-28-1916 458 260-1


Conveyance I Grantor I Inst. I Grantee

3774 (1 apna) - 932 Alaala Test. Kalua

3774 Kaaihue Kekuku Deed Keliiinulama & Mooheau 12-8-1871 12-12-1871 33 391

3774/932 Keliiinulama Deed J. K. Kaulia 2-16-1894 1-5-1897 165 458

3774/932 1. K. Kaulia Deed Keliiinulama & Mooheau 2-16-1894 1-5-1897 165 459

3774 Lizzie and D. McKeague Deed Wm. Peterson 12-22-1896 1-5-1897 165 460

3774 William Peterson Mortg. P. Dodge 11-5-1896 1-19-1897 166 325-6

3774 P. Dodge Release William Peterson 9-28-1897 10-4-1897 166 325

3774 Wm. Peterson Deed Wilford Woodruff (Church) 9-27-1897 11-10-1897 172 480

3789 (2 'apana) - 6534 Opala1.03 (three 'apana)* Kawaipua & Kaloana Deed Uluhani 12-12-1892 1-12-1903 248 35

..- 1.03 acres of 3789 Hilo Kaihe Deed Napolean K. Pukui 12-26-1911 3-28-1912 365 203-40'\ 1.03 acres of 3789 Napolean K. Pukui Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 4-12-1912 4-18-1912 358 324-500

.60 (both 'apana) Makakoa Aukai & Husband Deed Mrs. Kamakea Kaleohano 4-29-1912 9-16-1912 375 192-4

.65 acres (both 'apana) Kamakea and Gus Kaleohano Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 11-27-1912 11-29-1912 370 397-8

* Opala only recieved two 'apana, however, he testifeid to three 'apana.



3807 (3 'apana) - 929 Laielohelohe

1.04 acres (all 3 'apana) Kamaneo Deed Abela (Ake1a) 1-5-1866 1-29-1866 20 444

3807 Manaia (Keao and Ake1a) Deed Haaheo 8-12-1885 9-14-1885 94 394-5

1.07 acres (all 3 'apana) Haaheo & Kaaihue Mortg. James R Holt Jr. 8-12-1885 9-14-1885 94 395-6

3807 James R Holt Jr. AIM Estate of R W. Holt 3-21-1887 3-21-1887 105 91-2

3807 H. Cartwright Tr. of RW. Holt Est. Fore!. Haaheo & Kaaihue 10-25-1888 11-10-1888 113 343-4

3807 H. Cartwright Tr. of RW. Holt Est. Deed Charles W. Booth 10-24-1888 11-10-1888 113 347

3807 Charles W. Booth Deed Apike1a & W. Ka1una 9-11-1890 9-15-1890 125 361-2

3807 Apike1a & W. Ka1una Deed Mrs. E. Kahui1a Wilcox 9-15-1890 9-15-1890 127 44

3807 Mrs. E. Kahui1a Wilcox Deed Jospeh F. Smith (Chuch) 4-10-1905 4-13-1905 266 372

3807 Manaia and Ke1upaina Deed Jospeh F. Smith (Chuch) 4-8-1918 4-11-1918 495 170

.-. 3807 Oliva & Kaannaana Deed Jospeh F. Smith (Chuch) 4-9-1918 4-17-1918 498 55-60'1

3807 George Deed Jospeh F. Smith (Church) 4-29-1918 4-30-1918 498 132-3\0

3859 (2 'iipana) - 5068 Pahumoa Test. Koaa

.53 acres ('apana 1) Pahomua, Maryan, Peahi, & Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 3-12-1915 3-19-1915 428 81-2

Lehapa Kamakeeaina3859 Joseph Kekuku Deed Heber J. Grant (Church) 2-28-1922 4-26-1922 634 136-7

Liber 634, Page 138 Heber J. Grant (Church) Cor. Deed K. Kekuku 6-9-1924 8-2-1924 730 497

3861 (3 'apana) - 2048 Pu1ehu

1.19 acres (all 3 'apana) John Uluhani Deed Ka10ana Kawaipua 12-12-1892 12-12-1892 141 52

.65 acres ( 'apana 2 & 3) David & Kapu Ma1u Deed Joseph F. Smith ( Church) 9-1-1902 7-9-1913 392 452-3

1.19 acres (all 3 'apana) Hi10 Kaihe Deed Joseph F. Smith ( Church) 11-14-1912 12-9-1912 382 218-9

'apana 1 David & Kapu Malo Deed Joseph F. Smith ( Church) 1-31-1916 2-19-1916 442 278-9



3864 (2 'apana) - None Paiakea

'apana 2 Mrs. Kaiwihaona apio Enoka Ex. Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 8-20-1902 8-23-1902 241 91

3864 Mrs. Kaiwihaona apio Enoka Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 8-20-1902 11-14-1912 382 156-7

3864 Mrs. Kaiwihaona apio Enoka Deed Liki Beniamina 2-8-1910 3-11-1910 332 56

3864 Liki Beniamina Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 9-24-1910 1-14-1911 335 446-7

3873 (4 'apana) - None Paakahi

3873 Nahulu and Puaaiki (Paakahi ) Deed Kaaihue 1-31-1872 3-2-1878 53 358

3873 Kaapokalani Deed Iosepa Kekuku 9-17-1887 11-10-1896 165 293-4

3873 Joseph & Miriama Kekuku Deed L. B. Nainoa (guardian) 9-29-1895 11-10-1896 165 294-5

.91 acres ('apana 1 & 3 & 5) Lyons B. Nainoa Ex. Deed Jospeh F. Smith ( Church) 7-1-1896 11-14-1912 382 152-4

'apana 2 Lyons B. & Kapualahaole Nainoa Deed Jospeh F. Smith ( Church) 9-18-1902 11-29-1912 370 396-7

- 3873 Mrs. E. Kahuila Wilcox Deed Jospeh F. Smith ( Church) 4-10-1905 4-13-1905 266 372-..,J

.25 acres ('apana 4) Lyons B. Nainoa Deed Jospeh F. Smith ( Church) 1-7-1916 8-3-1918 505 210

3933 (5 'iipana) - 1533 Napaeko Test. Elemakule

3933 Hookaaku and Kulia or Julia Deed Liki Beniamina 9-13-1872 11-17-1880 64 484

3933 Awana Deed Liki & Niuolaa 3-1901 4-4-1901 217 475-6

3933 D. & Moeikuahiwi Kamauoha Deed Mary Worthington 4-1-1903 4-7-1903 249 75

3933 Mary Worthington Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 8-28-1903 9-1-1903 250 212-3

.75 acres (all 5 'apana) Liki Beniamina Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 8-7-1903 2-9-1911 340 347-8


IConveyance I Grantor Inst. I Grantee

3936 (7 'apana) - 3009/6538 Nakahili Test. Elemakule

.8 acres ('apana 7) Sam Kii Lease Chun See Lim 4-1-1882 6-8-1882 76 30

2.54 acres (all 7 'apana) Sam Kii and Kaaikaula Mortg. S. W. Wilcox 4-23-1885 4-30-1885 94 174

2.54 acres (all 7 'apana) S. W. Wilcox F/A Sam Kii and Kaaikaula 12-23-1889 12-24-1889 121 132-3

2.54 acres (all 7 'apana) S. W. Wilcox Deed Cecil Brown 12-23-1889 1-13-1890 122 37-8

2.54 acres (all 7 'apana) Cecil Brown Deed William R. Castle 2-21-1890 7-14-1890 122 477

2.54 acres (all 7 'apana) William R. and Ida Beatrice Castle Deed Andrew Adams 3-27-1905 4-4-1905 266 333-5

2.54 acres (all 7 'apana) Andrew Adams Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 4-13-1905 4-13-1905 266 373-4

3939 (3 'apana) - 1301 Nahelehele1301 'apana 1,2,3 Mahunalii Deed Kahoe 4-4-1860 6-2-1876 45 449-50

1301 'apana 1,2,3 Kahoe Deed Kaheana 3-3-1884 3-3-1884 87 300-1- 2.6 acres (all three 'apana) Kaheana Deed Cecil Brown 7-14-1896 7-14-1897 164 14-.l-3945 (3 'apana) - 1306 Napahu

3945 K. Kuahine (Napahu) Deed Makahiwa K. Lua 10-10-1907 10-17-1907 296 354


4003 (3 'apana) - 1444 Hano.92 acres (all three 'apana) Kaolelo Deed Makole 6-8-1876 7-1-1876 46 184-5

4003 John Ulahani Mortg. Cecil Brown 12-9-1892 12-9-1892 138 363-4

.92 acres (all 3 'apana) Kawaipua & Kaloana Deed Uluhani 12-12-1892 1-12-1903 248 35

4003 Cecil Brown Release John Ulahani 12-1-1893 12-1-1893 138 363-4

.25 acres ('apana 3) Uluhani Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 9-1-1902 8-25-1908 305 369-70

.92 acres (all 3 'apana) Hilo Kaihe Deed Napolean K. Pukui 12-26-1911 3-28-1912 365 203-4

.92 acres (all 3 'apana) Napolean K. Pukui Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 4-12-1912 4-18-1912 358 324-5

.92 acres (all 3 'apana) Makakoa Aukai & Husband Deed Mrs. Kamakea Kaleohano 4-29-1912 9-16-1912 375 192-4

.92 acres (all 3 'apana) Kamakea and Gus Kaleohano Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 11-27-1912 11-29-1912 370 397-8


I I IConveyance Grantor Inst. Grantee4039 (2 'iipana) - None Kalawaiaholona Test. Kaneipu

.3 acres ('apana 2) K. Kalima Ex. Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 8-28-1902 10-6-1908 311 65-6

.22 acres (' apana 1) Kaaimea Palule Deed Palule Kahaleulei 11-19-1919 11-24-1919 525 373

'apana 1 Mary Ulei Deed Zions Securities Corporation 5-26-1930 5-29-1930 1068 51-2

4061 (5 'iipana) 3010 Kuku4061 Joel and Kahula Kupau (Kuku ) Deed David Waihoula 7-5-1907 7-10-1907 292 347-8

.91 acres (all 5 'apana) David and Puni Waihoula Deed Jospeh F. Smith (Church) 9-15-1910 1-14-1911 335 444-5

4269 (2 'iipana) - 928 Kala Test. Kawaa to Kamauoha

.76 acres (both 'apana) J. & Keahi Keaula Deed Mrs. Keakaohawaii Kamauoh: 10-16-1913 10-16-1913 395 246-7

...... .76 acres (both 'apana) David Diamond Deed Heleloa Nailieha 4-14-1915 6-27-1916 458 97-9-....J .76 acres (both 'apana) Abraham Keaulana Deed Mrs. Keakaohawaii Kamauoh: 2-1-1918 2-11-1918 492 127-8tv

.76 acres (both 'apana) H. N. & Keakaohawaii Kamauoha Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 7-27-1918 11-8-1918 510 181-2

4270 (7 'iipana) - 1302 Keao

4270 Manaia (Keao) Deed Haaheo 8-12-1885 9-14-1885 94 394

2.33 acres (all 7 'apana) Haaheo and Kaaihue Mortg. James R Holt Jr. 8-12-1885 9-14-1885 94 395-6

2.33 acres (all 7 'apana) James R Holt Jr. AIM Estate ofRW. Holt 3-21-1887 3-21-1887 105 91

2.33 acres (all 7 'apana) Trustee of R W. Holt Estate Deed Charles W. Booth 10-24-1888 11-10-1888 113 347

2.33 acres (all 7 'apana) H. Cartwright Tr. of R.W. Holt Est. Forcl. Haaheo & Kaaihue 10-25-1888 11-10-1888 113 343-4

4270 Charles W. Booth to Deed Apikela 9-11-1890 9-15-1890 125 361

4270 Apikela & W. Kaluna Deed Mrs. E. Kahuila Wilcox 9-15-1890 9-15-1890 127 44-5

4270 Mrs. E. Kahuila Wilcox Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 4-10-1905 4-13-1905 266 372

4270 Manaia & Kelupaina Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 4-8-1918 4-11-1918 495 170

4270 Oliva Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 4-9-1918 4-17-1918 498 55-6

4270 George Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 4-29-1918 4-30-1918 498 121-3



4271 (3 'apana) - 3387 Kaleo'apana 1 & 2 (all other lands) Anna Haaheo Kaniela & Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 10-11-1918 10-17-1918 500 77-79

M. D. Kaniela

4272 (3 'apana) 2917 Koi4272 George and Kalo (Koi) Deed Kiaimalani & Kalo 4-10-1878 4-12-1878 53 460

4272 Kiaimalani & Kalo Deed Paina Niuholo 12-17-1984 8-2-1986 102 210-1

.125 acres (portion of 'apana 2) Samuel Woolley (Church) Deed Paina Niuholo 9-20-1901 12-30-1903 254 191

.125 acres (portion of 'apana 2) Paina Niuholo Deed Samuel Woolley (Church) 9-20-1901 10-6-1908 311 63-5

1.686 acres ('apana 2 & 3) James Haiku (Niuholo) Deed James K. Paele & Wife 4-12-1909 4-12-1909 316 186-7

.36 acres ('apana 1) James K. Paele & Wife Deed JohnAiu 9-20-1917 9-22-1917 482 325-6

- .36 acres ('apana 1) JohnAiu Deed John Nakookoo Tr. 9-27-1917 10-2-1917 482 398-.I

4272 Manaia and Kelupaina Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 4-8-1918 4-11-1918 495 170w

Oliva and wife Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 4-9-1918 4-17-1918 498 55

4272 James A. Haiku Deed Clara Maile Tr. 9-21-1918 9-24-1918 502 392-3

'apana 1 Clara Maile Tr. Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 11-18-1918 11-20-1918 495 453

4272 Jospeh K. Polani Deed Ida K. Kakalia 11-14-1929 11-14-1929 1037 228-9

4272 Manuel Kaupe & Wife and Deed Zions Securities 8-26-1930 8-29-1930 1081 20-2

Ela & Wife

4280 (1 'apana) - None KauhaneMrs. Kaaimea Palule (Kauhane ) Deed Wm. P. Schutte 11-19-1919 11-24-1919 535 372



4281 (2 apna) - 7614 Kaunahi.55 acres (both acres) Kaunahi and Kaalaapou Deed S. W. Kahai 3-22-1883 2-13-1884 83 266-7

4281 S. W. Kahai & Malia Deed Kapuna (w) 2-9-1884 2-13-1884 83 267-8

4281 Jonatana Kupua (Kapuna ) Deed Ioela Kupau 3-3-1886 7-30-1886 98 316-6

4281 Ioela Kupau Deed K. Kalawaia 3-15-1888 3-19-1888 110 128-9

4281 Kaili & Kalawaiahina Deed M. Kamauoha 11-11-1891 2-24-1892 135 152

'apana 1 Abrahama Keaulana Deed Kapule Kuahine 4-18-1918 4-20-1918 498 76

4281 M. Kamauoha & Kalua Kalawaia Deed George Lokai Tr. 7-22-1918 7-22-1918 495 414-5


4283 (3 'iipana) - 923 Koula.42 acres ('apana 1) Mrs. Pono Lukia Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 5-17-1905 8-25-1908 305 370-1- .25 acres ('apana 3) Mrs. Pono Luutia Deed Mrs. Maliana Mitchell 6-30-1905 7-21-1905 272 321-2-...J

.j::>..4283 Ed & Maliana Mitchell Deed Loius T. Montera 10-23-1920 10-12-1920 576 113

'apana 3 Loius T. Montera & Mary Kaaa Deed Maliana Mitchell 10-20-1921 12-21-1921 620 62-3

'apana 2 Loius T. Montera & Mary Kaaa Lease Heber J. Grant (Church) 8-28-1925 12-29-1925 807 109-10

'apana 3 Ed Mitchell Mortg. Chinese Bank 8-16-1926 8-16-1926 848 299

'apana 3 Ed Mitchell Mortg. Territoral Savings 2-18-1927 2-19-1927 871 375

'apana 3 Ed Mitchell Mortg. Chinese Mutual 7-9-1929 7-18-1929 1013 279

'apana 3 Ed Mitchell Jr. Lease William Lee Kwai 9-13-1930 9-18-1930 1084 57-59

'apana 3 Chinese Mutual Forcl. Ed Mitchell 10-6-1931 10-6-1931 1133 43-47

4286 (1 'iipana) - None Kanehoa

4286 Kuahine Mortg. A. W. McWayne 10-11-1890 10-11-1890 128 111

4286 A. W. McWayne Release Cecil Brown 10-29-1894 10-30-1894 128 111

4286 ('apana 1 & 2)* Kuahine Deed Cecil Brown 12-12-1901 12-14-1901 229 270

'apana 2 John & wife Deed Cecil Brown 2-10-1912 2-10-1912 362 140-142

* Kanehoa only recieved one 'apana.



4288 (1 'apana) - None Kaonohi(Kuleana Mahele) S. T. Kaiapa & Wife Deed Kaiwihaono 11-20-1893 4-16-1907 292 146

4290 (4 'iipana) - 3008 Kaiolohia4290 Kanakanui & Nania Deed Kapuahelani 8-29-1882 1-15-1883 78 148-9

1.40 (all 4 'apana) Kapuahelanai Deed Robert Nakea 10-10-1889 9-10-1890 127 31

1.40 (all 4 'apana) Kapuahelani & D. Nakea Mortg. William Castle 7-1-1890 9-5-1890 126 228-9

1/3 int Kaipuonio Rls. Dwr L. Nakea 11-19-1890 11-29-1890 125 483

3008 Lepeka Nakea Deed Cecil Brown 7-22-1891 9-14-1891 133 231-21.40 (all 4 'apana) William Castle Release Kapuahelani 9-12-1891 9-14-1891 126 229

1.40 (all 4 'apana) Lepeka Nakea Mortg. William Castle 11-23-1891 11-27-1891 129 343-4

...... 1.40 (all 4 'apana) William Castle Release Lepeka Nakea 2-10-1898 2-15-1898 129 344-...J

1.40 (all 4 'apana) Dick & Lebeka Nakea Deed M. Kealoha Roberts 2-11-1898 2-14-1898 177 209-210VI

4290 William Castle AIM Western Hawaii Inv. 2-12-1898 2-15-1898 174 408-9

4290 Western Hawaii Investment AIM L. L. McCandless 4-1-1907 4-3-1907 174 406

4291 (3 'iipana) - 3389 Kapule Test. Kaleo

4291 Anna Haaheo & Keawe Lease Akaiko 1-1-1892 2-13-1892 134 385-6

.59 acres ('apana 2) Kaleo K. et al (Anna Haaheo) Lease Lau lana 10-10-1898 10-21-1898 184 429

'apana 3 Anna Haaheo & Kaihe Deed 1. W. Keanu 3-30-1907 4-30-1907 291 141

4291 1. W. Keanu Deed Andrew Adams 5-28-1909 8-21-1909 317 280-1

'apana 3 Andrew Adams Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 8-19-1909 8-21-1909 317 281-2

'apana 2 Anna Haaheo Kaniela & Kaihe Deed George K. Kekauoha 10-21-1911 2-3-1912 360 154-5

'apana 1 Anna Haaheo Kaniela & M. Kanieh Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 10-11-1918 10-17-1918 500 77-79

1.05 acres Dick Diamond Deed Heleloa Nailieha 4-14-1915 6-27-1918 458 97-9


I I IConveyance Grantor lost. Grantee

4293 (3 'apana) - 2915 Keawe Test. Koihae (daughter)

'apana 1,2, & 3 Keawe Deed Kawaa 4-8-1854 4-8-1854 6 102-3

'apana 1,2, & 3 Kawaa Deed Kanakanui 10-8-1863 4-1-1868 25 235

1.69 acres (all 3 'apana) Kanakanui & Nania Deed Kapuahelani 8-29-1882 1-15-1883 78 148-9

1.69 acres (all 3 'apana) Kapuahelani Mortg. Estate of R. W. Holt 12-30-1882 1-15-1883 77 197

1.69 acres (all 3 'apana) Kapuahe1anai Deed Robert Nakea 10-10-1889 9-10-1890 127 31-2

1.69 acres (all 3 'apana) Kapuahe1ani & D. Nakea Mortg. William Castle 7-1-1890 9-5-1890 126 228-9

1.69 acres (all 3 'apana) Estate of R. W. Holt Release Kapuahe1ani 9-5-1890 9-8-1890 77 197

1.69 acres (all 3 'apana) William Castle Release Kapuahe1ani 9-12-1891 9-14-1891 126 229

1.69 acres (all 3 'apana) Lepeka Nakea Mortg. William Castle 11-23-1891 11-27-1891 129 343-4

1.69 acres (all 3 'apana) William Castle Release Labeka Nakea 2-10-1898 2-15-1898 129 344

- 1.69 acres (all 3 'apana) Dick & Lebeka Nakea Deed M. Kea10ha Roberts 2-11-1898 2-14-1898 177 209-210'-J

4293 Keaoloha Roberts Mortg. Willam Castle 2-11-1898 2-11-1898 174 406-70\

4293 William Castle AIM Western Hawaii Inv. 2-12-1898 2-15-1898 174 408-9


.95 acres ('apana 1) L. L. McCandless and Elizabeth Deed Jospeh F. Smith (Church) 9-20-1917 1-20-1917 480 435-6

4297 (3 'apana) - 1446 Kapuaokahla1.40 acres (all 3 'apana) Kanakanui & Nania Deed Kapuahelani 8-29-1882 1-15-1883 78 148-9

1.40 acres (all 3 'apana) Kapuahe1ani Mortg. Estate of R. W. Holt 12-30-1882 1-15-1883 77 197

1.40 acres (all 3 'apana) Kapuahelani Deed Robert Nakea 10-10-1889 9-10-1890 127 31-2

1.40 acres (all 3 'apana) Estate of R. W. Holt Release Kapuahelani 9-5-1890 9-8-1890 77 197

4297 Kahunapaa Deed Mrs. Kaiwihaona apio Enoka 3-28-1901 4-4-1901 217 474-5

4297 Mrs. Kaiwihaona apio Enoka Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 8-20-1902 11-14-1912 382 156-7

'apana 3 Mrs. Kaiwihaona apio Enoka Ex. Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 8-20-1902 8-23-1902 241 91

4297 Mrs. Kaiwihaona apio Enoka Deed Liki Beniamina 2-8-1910 3-11-1910 332 56

4297 Liki Beniamina Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 9-24-1910 1-14-1911 335 446-7

Table. 38 (continued) Deed History of Ui'ie's Land Commission Awards


4298 (3 'iipana) - None Kaualewa

Nawai Deed Kaaihue 3-4-1873 3-4-1873 36 370

4300 (4 'iipana) - 3098 Waikupulani.98 acres (all 3 'apana) D. & S. Waiwaiole Mortg. H. A. Wideman 12-19-1883 12-22-1883 85 219-20

.98 acres (all 3 'apana) H. A. Wideman Release D. & S. Waiwaiole 12-11-1886 12-13-1886 85 219

.98 acres (all 3 'apana) D. & S. Waiwaiole Mortg. Robert Hind 11-24-1886 12-13-1886 100 470

.98 acres (all 3 'apana) Robert Hind Release D. & S. Waiwaiole 7-20-1895 7-24-1895 100 470

4300 Dick and Lepeka Nakea Mortg. J. H. Schnack 2-25-1897 2-26-1897 170 20-1

4300 1. H. Schnack Release Dick and Lepeka Nakea 2-12-1898 2-16-1898 170 20-1

4300 William Castle AIM Western Hawaii Inv. 2-12-1898 2-15-1898 174 408

4300 Dick & Lebeka Nakea Deed M. Kealoha Roberts 2-11-1898 2-14-1898 177 209-210......

4300 Western Hawaii Investment AIM L. L. McCandless 4-1-1907 4-3-1907 174 406-..,J-..,J

.98 acres (all 4 'apana) Dick Diamaond Deed Heleloa Nailieha 4-14-1915 6-27-1918 458 97-9

4301 (4 'iipana) - 2916 Kanakanui'apana 4 Kanakanui and Namia Deed Kapuahelani 6-5-1882 9-18-1891 133 246-7

.5 acres ('apana ?) Kapuahelani Mortg. S. J. Shaw 6-17-1882 6-21-1882 76 59-60

3.72 acres (includes all 4 'apana) Kapuahelani & D. Nakea Mortg. William Castle 7-1-1890 9-5-1890 126 228-9

4301 Lepeka Nakea Lease Cecil Brown 11-19-1890 12-4-1890 128 243-5

3.72 acres (includes all 4 'apana) William Castle Release Kapuahelani 9-12-1891 9-14-1891 126 229

'apana 4 Lepeka Nakea Deed Cecil Brown 7-22-1891 9-14-1891 133 231-2

2.07 acres (includes 'apana 1-3) Dick & Lepeka Nakea Mortg. William Castle 11-23-1891 11-27-1891 129 343-4

.5 acres ('apana ?) S. J. Shaw Release Kapuahelani 12-30-1892 12-31-1892 76 59

2.07 acres (includes 'apana 1-3) William Castle Release Dick & Lepeka Nakea 2-10-1898 2-15-1898 129 344

2.07 acres (includes 'apana 1-3) Dick & Lebeka Nakea Deed M. Kealoha Roberts 2-11-1898 2-14-1898 177 209-210

4301 William Castle AM Western Hawaii Inv. 2-12-1898 2-15-1898 174 408-9




4302 (4 'apana) ·1300 Kauaikaua.56 acres ('apana 2) Mahu Kahoino Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 12-16-1899 2-23-1901 222 18-19

.36 acres ('apana 4) Hattie and Josiah Keaulana Deed D. Kamaouha 8-4-1905 9-23-1905 270 379-81

.25 acres ('apana 1) Hattie Noaia Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 7--1911 1-15-1911 345 309-10

4302 J., Abraham, & Flora Keaulana Deed 1. K. Nakookoo Tr. 5-25-1917 8-1-1917 482 19-20

4302 Sam & Hattie J. (Keaulana) Noiai Deed 1. K. Nakookoo Tr. 5-25-1917 8-1-1917 482 18

4325 (1 'apana) - 1304 Kohale4325 Kaiawa Kiaimoku Deed Oopala 12-18-1882 1-8-1883 78 131-2

4325 John Ulahani Mortg. Cecil Brown 12-9-1892 12-9-1892 138 363-4

1.25 acres (l 'apana) Kawaipua & Kaloana Deed John Ulahani 12-12-1892 1-12-1903 248 35

- 4325 Cecil Brown Release John Ulahani 12-1-1893 12-1-1893 138 363-4-.....l

1.25 acres (l 'apana) Hilo Kaihe Deed Napolean K. Pukui 12-26-1911 3-28-1912 365 203-400

1.25 acres (1 'apana) Napolean K. Pukui Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 4-12-1912 4-18-1912 358 324-5

1.25 acres (l 'apana) Makakoa Aukai & Husband Deed Mrs. Kamakea Kaleohano 4-29-1912 9-16-1912 375 192-4

1.25 acres (l 'apana) Kamakea and Gus Kaleohano Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 11-27-1912 11-29-1912 370 397-8

4326 (5 'apana) - None Koalaukanu Test. Kaneipu

4326 Koa Deed Emely Naone 10-11-1909 8-31-1912 372 172

4326 Emely Naone Deed S. Tashiro 4-4-1921 5-11-1921 590 200

4329 (3 'apana) - 931 KaJua1.04 acres ('apana 1, 2, & 3) Kalua Deed Eleakala 4-21-1884 5-26-1884 89 68

1.04 acres ('apana 1, 2, & 3) Eleakala & Kamaka Deed Church 7-6-1892 4-21-1919 512 341


I I IConveyance Grantor Inst. Grantee4331 (3 'apana) - 3383 Kamano Test. Keliiwaiwaiho1e Jr.

.62 acres (all 3 'apana) D. & S. Waiwaio1e Mortg. H. A. Wideman 12-19-1883 12-22-1883 85 219-20

.62 acres (all 3 'apana) D. & S. Waiwaio1e Mortg. Robert Hind 11-24-1886 12-13-1886 100 470

.62 acres (all 3 'apana) H. A. Wideman Release D. & S. Waiwaio1e 12-11-1886 12-13-1886 85 219

.62 acres (all 3 'apana) Robert Hind Release D. & S. Waiwaiole 7-20-1895 7-24-1895 100 470'apana 3 l, Luke1a, Kaehu, & I. Waiwaio1e Deed Kamakeeaina 6-10-1896 9-26-1921 607 302

4333 (3 'iipana) - 925 MahunalH'apana 1,2, & 3 Pia & Kahu1ialii Deed Keakua 6-6-1886 5-18-1886 102 46-7

'apana 2 & 3 Keakua Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 4-9-1900 4-14-1912 382 154-5'apana 1 Keakua Deed George K. Kekauoha 2-6-1902 10-11-1902 238 367

..- .38 acres ('apana 1) George K. & Jennie Kekauoha Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 8-31-1904 10-10-1904 258 421-.l

.83 acres ('apana 2 & 3) Na1iihookaeia Deed Herbert Ahuna 6-26-1918 6-28-1918 495 382-3\0

.83 acres ('apana 2 & 3) Kipo1a Ah Nee Deed David Kamauoha Jr. 8-9-1918 8-12-1918 505 27-28

4334 (4 'iipana) - 924 Kalou4334 Dick and Lepeka Nakea Mortg. l H. Schnack 2-25-1897 2-26-1897 170 20-1

4334 Dick & Lebeka Nakea Deed M. Kea10ha Roberts 2-11-1898 2-14-1898 177 209-210

4334 J. H. Schnack Release Dick and Lepeka Nakea 2-12-1898 2-16-1898 170 20-1

4334 William Castle AIM Western Hawaii Inv. 2-12-1898 2-15-1898 174 408


4336 (3 'iipana) - 1298 Kekui4336 Jonatana Kupau (Kapuna) Deed Mahinae1ee1e 3-3-1886 7-30-1886 98 315-6

4336 Mahinae1ee1e Deed Dina Kapahu 7-31-1893 10-25-1893 141 466-7

1.36 acres (all 3 'apana) l K. and Emily K. Smith Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 6-5-1914 7-22-1914 405 298-9


Conveyance I Grantor I Inst. I Grantee4338 (2 'spana) - 920 Kahalelaau

4338 Helenihi & Puna Huluhulu Deed Iosia W. Waiwaiole

.95 acres (both 'apana) Josiah Waiwaiole Deed J. Kekuku

.95 acres (both 'apana) Joseph & Miriam Kekuku Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church)

4342 (3 'spana) • 3509 Kapuaokahla Test. Kaumanu

Kuai Deed Mahakea

8-11-1884 9-4-1884 91 186-7

11-3-1913 11-4-1913 390 311-2

4-1-1914 4-24-1917 465 189-90

11-30-1864 10-30-1867 24 371

.....00o

4343 (2 'spana) - 1305 Kauaimano4343 John Ulahani

1.05 acres (includes both 'apana) John Uluhani

4343 Cecil Brown

4343 Kawaipua & Kaloana

4343 Kawaipua & Kaloana

4343 D & Moeikuahiwi Kamauoha

4343 Mary Worthington

1.05 acres (includes both 'apana) Hilo Kaihe

.33 acres (both 'apana) Moeikuahiwi Kamauoha

Mortg.

Deed

Release

Deed

Deed

Deed

Deed

Deed

Mortg.

Cecil Brown

Kaloana Kawaipua

John Ulahani

Davida Moeikuahiwi

Moonoha

Mary Worthington

Joseph F. Smith ( Church)

Joseph F. Smith ( Church)

Samuel Woolley (Church)

12-9-1892 12-9-1892

12-12-1892 12-12-1892

12-1-1893 12-1-1893

11-27-1894 5-16-1902

11-27-1894 5-24-1902

4-1-1903 4-7-1903

8-28-1903 9-1-1903

11-14-1912 12-9-1912

8-7-1918 10-11-1918

138

141

138

231

231

249

250

382

490

363-4

52

363-4

379-80

411-12

75

212-13

218-9

427-8

4345 (2 'spana) - 3413

'apana 1 & 2

'apana 1

4345

KaumiumiKakahoolae

Kapuna

Jonatana Kupua (Kupuna)

Test. Kiniakua

Deed Kapuna

Ex. Deed George Nebeker (Church)

Deed Ioela Kupau

2-17-1863 6-2-1885 96

9-16-1872 4-30-1874 39

3-10-1886 7-30-1886 98

101-2

260

315-7



4361 (3 'apana) - 1297 Kli

.37 acres ('apana 2) Hanio Deed Goerge K. Kekauoha 2-19-1901 2-25-1901 261 431

.37 acres ('apana 2) George K. & Jennie Kekauoha Deed Joseph F. Smith ( Church) 8-2-1901 9-14-1901 225 291-2

4361 Hanio Deed Kenoa 2-3-1902 2-8-1902 234 80-1

4361 Kaihe Hilo Deed H. N. Kamauoha 4-8-1902 4-11-1902 231 290

4361 Kenoa Deed Solomona Kahawaii 4-16-1903 4-18-1903 248 322

.37 acres Keakaohawaii & H. N. Kamauoha, Deed Solomona Kahawaii 7-24-1903 9-17-1903 250 299-300

and Joseph & Miriam Kekuku

4361 Eliza Shimonishi, Joseph Kahawii, Deed Kipi Kahawaii 2-3-1910 2-12-1910 128-16: 165-7

and Serna & Solomon Jf. Kahawaii

4361 Kipi Kahawaii Deed Opio Kahawaii 8-14-1915 9-4-1915 435 4

-004451 (4 'apana) - None Kuapau-

4451 P. Polani Deed Makahanohano 1-27-1866 4-24-1884 85 486-7

4451 Keau (Makahanohano) Mortg. John S, Walker 4-19-1884 4-24-1884 86 489-90

John S. Walker Release Keau 10-27-1885 10-27-1885 86 489

.97 acres (all 4 'apana) Abelema Deed J. W. Keau 1-4-1894 7-3-1917 478 70-1

'apana 1, 2, & 3 J. W. Keau Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 8-25-1902 11-14-1912 382 157-8

'apana 1,2,3, & 4 JohnAiu Deed Elizabeth K. Nakookoo 4-11-1917 4-27-1917 465 194-5

4514 (7 'apana) - 919 Pupuka'apana 1,2,3, & 7 Kapuna & Kupau Ex. Deed H. H. Cluff (Church) 5-25-1882 8-8-1882 75 274-5

4514 Ioela Kupau Deed Mahinaeleele 3-3-1886 7-30-1886 98 315-6

4514 Mahinaeleele Deed Dina Kapahu 7-31-1893 10-25-1893 141 466-7

4514 J. K. Smith Deed Jospeph F. Smith (Church) 6-5-1914 7-22-1914 405 298



6989 (3 'iipana) - 930 Kahulia'apana 1, 2, & 3 Kaloana Deed Kaloana & Kawaipua 8-10-1875 7-1-1879 58 335

.40 acres (all 3 'apana) Kaloana Mort. S. E. Sandford 4-21-1885 6-9-1885 97 49-50

.40 acres (all 3 'apana) S. E. Sandford Release Kaloana & Kawaipua 1-30-1888 2-2-1888 97 50

'apana 3 Kaloana & Kawaipua Lease Akaiko 2-25-1890 4-16-1890 124 201-2

.64 acres (all 3 'apana) David & Kapu Malu Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 9-1-1902 7-9-1913 392 452-3

8355 (3 'iipana) - None Kakau'apana 1,2, & 3 Kaloana Deed Kaloana & Kawaipua 8-10-1875 7-1-1879 58 335

.40 acres (all 3 'apana) Kaloana Mort. S. E. Sandford 4-21-1885 6-9-1885 97 49-50

.40 acres (all 3 'apana) S. E. Sandford Release Kaloana & Kawaipua 1-30-1888 2-2-1888 97 50

- 'apana 2 David & Kapu Malu Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 9-1-1902 7-9-1913 392 452-300N

8440 (2 'iipana) - 7993 Kamamae8440 H. P. & Lillie Maeloa Deed Poouahi 5-31-1867 4-30-1874 39 262

8440 Poouahi Deed Josiah Kinohou 11-22-1882 11-30-1882 79 20-21

8440 Josiah K. Waiwaiole and Nahua Mort. M. M. Scott 10-7-1884 12-4-1884 88 464-5

8440 M. M. Scott Fore!. Josiah K. Waiwaiole & Nahua 9-9-1889 9-10-1889 118 261

.52 acres (both 'apana) M.M.Scott Deed Cecil Brown 9-9-1889 9-23-1889 118 310

8440 Cecil Brown Deed William R. Castle 12-11-1889 3-7-1890 122 212

8440 William Castle Deed Waiaele 11-25-1892 12-5-1892 141 29

.52 acres (both 'apana) Keawe & Emma Opio Deed Mrs. Kamakea Kaleohano 4-11-1916 4-15-1916 448 190

8440 Papa Kaio Deed Ivy Apuakeahau 8-23-1916 8-25-1916 448 340-1

.72 acres (2 both 'apana) Kanoe Kekauoha Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 2-6-1918 3-18-1918 465 498-500

.72 acres (2 both 'apana) Mrs. Kamakea Kaleohano Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 2-6-1918 3-18-1918 465 498-500



8443 (3 'apana) - 921 Kauhalekua'apana 1,2, & 3 Kauhalekua Deed Lili Koolua 2-15-1872 4-8-72 34 355-6

'apana 1, 2, & 3 Lilia Kahaiao Mortg. Henry Mulendorf 1-5-1894 1-5-1894 145 401

'apana 1,2, & 3 Lilia & Hanaukama Mortg. William Henry 4-13-1895 4-20-95 153 122

'apana 1,2, & 3 Henry Mulendorf Release Lilia Kahaiao 11-9-1896 11-9-1896 145 407

'apana 1,2, & 3 William Henry Release Lilia & Hanaukama 11-21-1896 12-11-1896 153 122

1.80 acres (all 3 'apana) Hanaukama Mortg. Lyons B. Nainoa 4-18-1901 10-30-1903 256 154-5

1.80 acres (all 3 'apana) Lyons Nainoa & Lilia Hanaukama Mortg. MBS 9-25-1907 9-30-1907 297 149-153

'apana 1,2, & 3 Lyons B. Nainoa & Wife Mortg. MBS 4-11-1908 4-11-1908 303 253

1.80 acres (all 3 'apana) Lyons B. Nainoa Release Hanaukama 12-31-1919 1-6-1920 542 374-5

1.80 acres (all 3 'apana) MBS Release Lyons B. Nainoa 12-6-1915 12-17-1925 434 464-5

-008580 (8 'apana) 6539/6898 Keliiwaiwaiholew

'apana 5 Mokulama Deed Namanohoe 5-26-1871 4-5-1877 48 492

8580 W. Punini Vi Deed H. N. Kamauoha 11-9-1878 5-6-1881 67 385

8580 Hookano Deed Kamauoha (Hookano) 5-3-1881 5-6-1881 67 386

8580 J. H. Kumakaha Deed David Kamauoha 10-17-1881 10-17-1881 70 224

8580 Kealai Deed H. N. Kamauoha 11-14-1881 11-17-1881 70 288

'apana 6 Puakalua Deed Mrs. Kapualahaole Nainoa 4-9-1886 10-2-1907 296 289

'apana 1 Koolua Deed W.K.Apuakeahau 4-9-1886 5-9-1914 405 141

'apana 2, 4, & 7 D. Puakulua Deed J. A. Kahiona 4-12-1886 1-14-1918 465 448

'apana 1 Koolua Deed 1. A. Kekuku 4-12-1886 8-22-1918 525 135-6

'apana 2 Joel Kahiona Ex. Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 4-21-1902 7-9-1913 382 450-2

'apana 2 Joseph F. Smith (Church) Deed Joel Kahiona 4-21-1902 5-20-1918 495 269-70

.53 acres ('apana 4) 1. A. Kahiona Deed Jospeh Kekuku 10-4-1907 11-18-1907 300 26-7

'apana 7 Joel A. Kahiona & Kealoha Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 10-4-1907 11-18-1907 300 26

'apana 6 Lyons B. Nainoa Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 10-25-1915 12-18-1915 442 59-60

Table. 38 (continued) Deed History of Ui'ie's Land Commission Awards


(Continued) 8580 (8 'apana) 6539/6898 Keliiwaiwaihole1.56 acres ('apana 6) Eliza Nainoa Deed Heber J. Grant (Church) 7-9-1918 11-8-1918 510 180

'apana 5 Joseph Kekuku Mortg. Heber J. Grant (Church) 5-16-1924 5-21-1924 725 275-6

1.56 acres (' apana 6) Moremona Naihoa Deed David Jellings 11-16-1925 11-16-1925 797 265-6

8580/6539 W. K. Apuakehau Deed George K. Kekauoha 11-27-1927 11-31-1928 925 126

8580-B (3 'iipana) - 1299 Palii'apana 1,2,3 Josua Napahu (palii) Deed Kuahine & Lewaina Kaupono 6-11-1886 6-21-1886 102 110-1

8580-B Kuahine Deed Kalakala K. Lua Jr. 10-29-1907 11-5-1907 296 448-9

8580-C (1 'iipana) - 1307 Kuanonoehu Test. Makeekapu, Kanio, Kupihea, Karnaka, Nahakuaina, & Kalili

8580-C / 1307 Keakaohawaii & H. N. Karnauoha Deed David, Charles, Kauahikaula 9-29-1901 9-18-1901 223 249-50.......

& Kaui Karnauoha; Hookano00..(:::.

Ahtian, Mrs. Kahili Kamalolo,

& Mrs. Kaeleele Pa

8580-C / 1307 Mrs. Hookano Karnauoha Deed Maniau Kamauoha 11-11-1914 11-11-1914 405 385-6

8580-C / 1307 Kualonoehu Deed Mrs. Louisa Martin 6-6-1917 6-30-1917 472 404-5

8580-C /1307 Mrs. Louisa Martin Deed Joseph F. Smith (Church) 6-21-1919 6-24-1919 514 336-7

8580-C /1307 J. & Eunice (Kamauoha) Ah Quin Deed David Karnauoha 6-7-1924 9-3-1924 747 117

8580-C / 1307 Eunice (Karnauoha) Ah Quin Deed David Karnauoha 8-20-1924 2-6-1925 759 377-8

8580-C / 1307 Kauahikaula & Haleola Kamauoha Deed David Kamauoha 2-24-1925 3-5-1925 764 460-1

8580-C / 1307 Maniau Kekauoha & Deed David Karnauoha 8-11-1925 8-11-1925 786 287

Kamakeekanu Afoon

9894 (3 'iipana) - None Nawai.45 acres (all 3 'apana) John Uluhani Deed Kaloana Kawaipua 12-12-1892 12-12-1892 141 52

.45 acres (all 3 'apana) David & Kapu Malu Deed Joseph F. Smith ( Church) 9-1-1902 7-9-1913 392 452-3

.45 acres (all 3 'apana) Hilo Kaihe Deed Joseph F. Smith ( Church) 11-14-1912 12-9-1912 382 218-9


I Conveyance I Grantor I Inst. I Grantee I Conveyed I RecordedI~ Page I10619 (1 'iipana) - 3097 Poouahi

10619 Poouahi Deed Josiah Kinohou 11-22-1882 11-30-1882 79 20-1

10619 Josiah K. Waiwaiole and Nahua Mortg. M. M. Scott 10-7-1884 12-4-1884 88 464-5

10619 M. M. Scott Ford. Josiah K. Waiwaiole & Nahua 9-9-1889 9-10-1889 118 261

10619 M.M.Scott Deed Cecil Brown 9-9-1889 9-23-1889 118 310

1.8 acres ('apana 1) Cecil Brown Deed William R. Castle 12-11-1889 3-7-1890 122 212

10619 William Castle Deed Waiaele 11-25-1892 12-5-1892 141 29

1.8 acres ('apana 1) Keawe & Emma Opio Deed Mrs. Kamakea Kaleohano 4-11-1916 4-15-1916 448 190

10619 Papa Kaio Deed Ivy Apuakeahau 8-23-1916 8-25-1916 448 340-1

10619 Ivy Apuakeahau Deed Joseph F. Smith ( Church) 2-6-1918 2-18-1918 465 498-500

10619 Kanoe Kekauoha Deed Joseph F. Smith ( Church) 2-6-1918 3-18-1918 465 498-500

- 10619 Mrs. Kamakea Kaleohano Deed Joseph F. Smith ( Church) 2-6-1918 3-18-1918 465 498-50000VI

10748 (4 'iipana) - None Puhipaka'apana 1, 2, 3, & 4 Kaaulani (wife ofPuhipaka) Deed Mahakea 11-30-1864 10-30-1867 24 369

10748 Lalawalu Deed Kuahine & Lewaina Kaupono 11-21-1884 6-2-1885 96 100-1

Lalawalu Deed Josua Mahakea-liilii 6-12-1887 6-28-1887 109 54-55

Kuahine Deed Kalakala K. Lua JI. 10-29-1907 11-5-1907 296 448

Kupele Akana Deed James Kawai 12-20-1918 12-23-1918 510 282-4

10763 (3 'iipana) - 1445 Puni Test. Paakahi

10763 Mahiai (Puni) Deed Ana Kanaau 5-28-1896 5-30-1896 159 368


468

141

343

302

406-7

126

83

405

160

159

158

925

4-30-1884 5-1-1884

4-9-1886 5-9-1914

4-24-1896 5-4-1896

4-24-1896 5-4-1896

4-24-1896 5-4-1896

11-27-1927 11-31-1928

I Conveyance I Grantor I Inst. I Grantee I Conveyed IRecorded~ Page I10822 (4 'apana) - 6521 Peka Test. S. W. Kaaipuaa

.72 acres (all 4 'apana) W.K Apua (peka) Mortg. A. Jaeger

10822 Puakalua and Mamauea Deed W. K. Apuakeahau

10822 A. Jaeger Forcl. W. K. Apua

10822 A. Jaeger Deed Armitage

all 4 'apana Armitage Deed A. Jaeger

10822 W. K. Apuakehau Deed George K. Kekauoha

10928 (3 'apana) 300713095 Ulukou

.21 acres ('apana 2) Lilia Kulaia Deed W. K. Apuakeahau 5-12-1913 5-12-1913 388 430-1

10928 Iokia Keliiwaiwaiole Deed Keaoloah Kalili 7-11-1918 7-20-1918 488 421-2

10928 Lilia Kulaia Deed Kamaka Logan 7-17-1918 8-2-1918 505 18- 'apana 1 & 3 Kamaka Logan Deed Kealoha Hamana 1-3-1919 9-22-1919 523 328-9000\

10928 Hamana Kealoha Kalili Deed Heber J. Grant (Church) 10-15-1919 3-10-1920 551 50-2

10928 W. K. Apuakehau Deed George K. Kekauoha 11-27-1927 11-31-1928 925 126

APPENDIX RRESDIENTS OF IOSEPA, UTAH

The following individuals resided in Iosepa, Utah between August 1889 and 1917.

This list combines several sources, but it does not provide a complete record of all the

Kanaka Maoli who resided in Iosepa during its existence. 1

AahawaKaloi (wife)child

George AlapaHarvey O. AlapaKaaikaula AlapaMary Kahoohlhii AlapaMoke Kaluna AlapaMoses AlapaNahinu AlapaOlivia AlapaElihue BarellJames BirdJoseph BirdJohn E. BroadKaohuhalalili BroadMaggie K BroadH.H. CluffWilliam ColesJoe Antone DrumondaElenaWilliam S. FreestonePeter N. GeorgeHaikiDora Kailiahi HalemanuEdwin Ioba HalemanuEmma Purcell HalemanuGeorge Delaware HalemanuMariah Ihuna HalemanuMatilda Kamehaililani HalemanuW.K Halemanu

Ellen Halemanu (wife)James Halemanu (son)

William Niewalani HalemanuLevi HanakeaNapapale Hanakea

Clara Kalimahii Mahoe HoopiiainaConnie HoopiiainaJohn HoopiiainaDavid Eleakala HubbellElizabeth Kaahu Haili HubbellJulia Kaala KawahinekawaiEdward Apua ImaikalaniHarvey K. ImaikalaniMary Pomaikai ImaikalaniWilliam KahanaKaihe

Kaua Kaihe (wife)child (daughter)

Joseph KO. KaihiwaiMarjorie Laie KailikeaJohn K KainiKapainui KalauaoKalawai

Kapainui (wife)MokeKalimaClara KalimahiiKanakanui KalumanoGeorge Kamakaniau

Kealohaniu Kamakaniau (wife)KapelaKapulaJohn William Kauleinamoku

Kapukini Kauleinamoku (wife)Emily Kaheana KealakaihonuaPeter Kealakaihonua

Kahiana Kealakaihonua (wife)Pelekane Kealakaihonua (son)Peter Kealakaihonua (son)

Emalane Kamaka Cain KealohapauoleKealaula KealohapauoleKalu Kealoha

1 Dennis Atkin, "A History ofIosepa, the Utah Polynesian Colony," (master's thesis, Brigham YoungUniversity, 1958.

"A List of Hawaiians in Utah Who Wish To Return to the Islands." F. O. & EX. Hawai'i StateArchives.

Patricia I. Kjelstrom, "Iosepa Cemetery: Burial Grounds of the Golden People," Salt Lake City, TheFamily History Library.

Harvey H. Cluff, Journal and Autobiography ofHarvey H. Cluff, vol. 2 (Salt Lake City: HistoricalDepartment of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 1972, microfilm), 20-21.

187

Keoki KekauohaNapahu Kekauoha (wife)child

Lala KekauohaHosea Nahina (Opio) Kekauoha Jr.Joseph Kekuku

Miliana Kekuku (wife)Edwin Kekuku (son)Hattie Kekuku (daughter)Ivy Kekuku (daughter)VIola Kekuku (daughter)

Archie KennisonMakaweli Kimimohulehiwa (widow)

childchild

KololiiF.M. Lyman Jr.Stella SImeafua MackieClara Kalimahii MahoeJ.K.N. Mahoe

Hana Mahoe (wife)Lucy Mahoe (daughter)

Lenerd Halemanu Vmi MahoeJohn Mahunalii

Victoria Mahunalii (wife)Elizabeth Mahunalii (daughter)

MahunaliiWihi Kolo Mahunalii (wife)children

Paria Pakakahaai MakaiauJohn Makakao

Lucy E. Makakao (wife)Makaopiopio (1st buried)John H. Makaula

Maria K. Makaula (wife)Frank W. MarchantF.A. MitchellMoehauHattie MokuikiDavid Mokuilima

Hookaia Mokuilima (wife)David Mokuilima (son)M~ Mokuilima (daughter)

Lane Wtliokai MokuilimaNakula MokuilimaCharles Naau

Jane Naau (wife)Emily S. NaauAbraham NahuluElekalia NahuluWaiamaka Nahulu

childchildchildchildchild

childKekuewa NakuaauNapapalu (widow of Kawahaia)

grandchildNapela

Machaho Napela (wife)Hattie Napela (daughter)

Henry K. Nawahine Sr.Cecelia NawahineIsaac Keahi NawahiniLuika (Louise) NawahiniMartha Kahokuwehilani NawahiniGeorge W. NiauKealohanui NiauNiehu (widower)

childLehiPaahaoPahauPakekepa (widow of Nika)

grandchildJohn Kelaoha PauoleKeoki PeheloBessie PetersN. PomaikaiAnnie Hulia PukahiSamuel Kauihou PukahiWilliam Pukahi Sr.Piipiilani SolomonaMoses Solomona

188

WORKS CITED

Adler, Jacob, and Robert M. Kamins. The Fantastic Life of Walter Murray Gibson:Hawaii's Minister ofEverything. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1986.

Ahloy, James K., "A Royal Legacy: The William Charles Lunalilo Trust Estate, UnderWill." Paper Presented to The Hawaiian Historical Society, 21 February 1991.

Alexander and Baldwin. Letter to Zions Securities Corporation, Honolulu, 7 November1930.

Allen, Riley H., "Where and How? 'Rehabilitation' Succeeds." Honolulu Star-Bulletin,Saturday, 10 September 1921: 1, 10.

Alexander, Arthur Chambers. "Land Titles and Surveys in Hawaii." In HawaiianPlanters Record (August 1920), 67-78.

Alexander, William D., "A Brief History of Land Titles in the Hawaiian Kingdom." InThe Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1891. Honolulu: Thomas G. Thrum, 1890.

Atkin, Dennis. "A History of Iosepa, the Utah Polynesian Colony." Master's thesis,Brigham Young University, 1958.

Baily, Paul. Hawaii's Royal Prime Minister: The Life and Times of Walter MurrayGibson. New York: Hastings House, 1980.

Baldrdige, Ken. "Tour of Historic Laie." In The Mormon Pacific Historical SocietyProceedings, Seventh Annual Conference. Ui'ie: Brigham YoungUniversity-Hawai'i, 1986.

Barrere, Dorothy B. comp., The King's Mahele: The Awardees and Their Lands.Honolulu: Dorothy B. Barrere, 1994.

Beck, Raymond Clyde. "Palawai Basin: Hawaii's Mormon Zion." Master's thesis,University of Hawai'i, 1972.

Bishop Estate. Kamehameha Schools. O'ahu. Quoted in Joseph Kennedy James Moore,and Laura Reinstema, An Archaeological Data Recovery Report for the ProposedKokololio Beach Park, Located at TMK: 5-5-1:54 Lii'iemalo '0 Ahupua 'a KoolauloaDistrict Island ofOahu revised December 1992. (Haleiwa: Archaeological Consultantsof Hawaii, Inc., 1992).

Black, Henry Campbell. Black's Law Dictionary. 5th ed. St. Paul, Minn.: WestPublishing, 1979.

Blackman, William Fremont. The Making ofHawaii: A Study ofSocial Evolution. NewYork: The MacMillan Company, 1906.

Bock, Comfort Margaret, "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the HawaiianIslands." Master's thesis, University of Hawai'i, 1941.

Bridges, Cy. Conversation with author, Ui'ie, 19 December 1996.

Britsch, R. Lanier. Moramona: The Mormons in Hawaii. Ui'ie: The Institute of PolynesianStudies, 1989.

189

Byron, Lord. Voyage of the H.M.S. Blonde to the Sandwich Islands in the Years,1824-1825. London: John Murray, 1826.

Chang, Jacqueline. "My Mother, Lucy Kulani Pukahi." Ui'ie, n.d.

Chase, Lance Davis. "The Hawaiian Mission Crisis of 1874: Character as Destiny." InMormon Pacific Historical Society Proceedings, First Annual Conference. Ui'ie:Brigham Young University-Hawai'i, 1980.

---. "The Meek Did Not Inherit the Earth: The 1927-1928 Laie Beach Front Sale andLawsuit." In Mormon Pacific Historical Society Proceedings, Fourteenth AnnualConference. Ui'ie: Brigham Young University-Hawai'i, 1993.

Chinen, Jon J., The Great Mahe1e Hawaii's Land Division of1848. Honolulu:University of Hawai'i Press, 1956.

Clawson, William H., "Zions Securities Corporation in Hawaii," Ui'ie, Brigham YoungUniversity-Hawai'i, 1989. Photocopy.

Cooke, J. P., Letter to J. F. Woolley, Honolulu: 12 September 1941.

Coulter, John Wesley. Population and Utilization ofLand and Sea in Hawai'i, 1853.Honolulu: Bernice P. Bishop Museum, 1931.

Cluff, Harvey H. Journal and Autobiography ofHarvey H. Cluff 2 vols. Salt LakeCity: Historical Department of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints,1972. Microfilm.

The CluffFamily Journal. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilm, n.d.

Cummings, David W., "A History of Laie." Ui'ie: Brigham Young University-Hawai'iArchives, n.d.

Day, Terry. "Kuleana Land Research A Case Study: Ahupuaa of Laie." Alu Like,Honolulu, 1976. Photocopy.

F. W. Makinney Abstract and Certificates of Title. Abstract Title ofChurch ofJesus ChristofLatter-Day Saints in and to All ofthat Tract ofLand Situate in the District ofKoo1au10a, Island ofOahu, Comprising the Ahupuaas ofLaiewai and La 'iema10 '0.Honolulu: F. W. Makinney Abstract and Certificates of Title, n.d.

Farrer, William. "BiograJ?,hical Sketch: Hawaiian Mission Report and Diary of WilliamFarrer, 1821-1906. 'Provo, Utah: Brigham Young Umversity Library, 1946.

Florin, Lambert. "Iosepa, Utah." In Ghost Town Trails. Seattle; Superior PublishingCompany, 1963.

Geddes, Sylvia M. "Laie, A Church Colony in Hawaii, Its Modem Aftermath." Ui'ie,1985. Photocopy.

Hammatt, Hallet H., Archaeological Survey ofthe Lii'ie Sewer Plant with HistoricalBackground on Lii'ie Ahupua'a. Honolulu: Cultural surveys Hawai'i, 1991.

Hammond, Francis Asbury. Journal of Francis Asbury Hammond. Salt Lake City:Historical Department for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1971.Microfilm.

190

Handy, E. S., and Elizabeth Green Handy, Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life,Lore, and Environment. Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press, 1972.

Hawai'i. Bureau of Conveyances. "W. C. Lunalilo to Charles Sumner, Lease." Liber 5(15 May 1852): 24l.

---. "W. C. Lunalilo by Guardianship to Henry S. Howland, Deed." Liber 14 (6 December1861): 405-6.

---. "Ihupuu to P. F. Manini, Deed." Liber 15 (3 July 1862): 277-278.

---. "H. S. Howland to R. Moffit, Deed." Liber 17(7 July 1863): 116-117.

---. "H. S. Howland to T. T. Daugherty, Deed." Liber 17 (7 July 1863): 117-119.

---. "Kaui to Mahakea, Deed." Liber 24 (10 March 1867): 371-372.

---. "F. A. Hammond to G. Nebeker, Deed." Liber 35 (24 April 1872): 62-63.

---. "George Nebeker to Frederick Mitchell, Deed." Liber 38 (13 June 1873): 69-70.

---. "John Taylor to Chun See Lin and Leong Wung, Lease." Liber 71 (3 October 1881):316-318.

---. "Frederick Mitchell to George Nebeker, Deed." Liber 75 (28 July 1882): 240-24l.

---. "George Nebeker to John Taylor, Trustee in Trust, Deed." Liber 75 (28 July 1882):241-242.

---. "J. Kupau To Mahinaeleele, Deed." Liber 98 (30 July 1886): 315-316.

---. "Affidavit of A. Jaeger on Foreclosure of Mortgage of Apua." Liber 160 (5 April1896): 343.

---. "K. Puahi to Wilford Woodruff, Deed." Liber 172 (28 October 1897): 444.

---. "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to Kwon Hip Wai Company, Lease."Liber 184 (4 June 1898): 57-59.

---. "Latter-Day Saint Ch. of Jesus Christ by atty of Tr., to Paina Nuholo, Deed." Liber254 (30 December 1903): 19l.

---. "S. Woolley to Wo Wai, Lease." Liber 218 (9 October 1901): 180-183.

---. "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints to S. Kahawaii, Deed." Liber 280(19 September 1906): 474-475.

---. "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints to K. Kahawaii, Deed." Liber280 (19 September 1906): 475-476.

---. "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints to L. B. Nainoa, Deed." Liber382 (14 November 1912): 153-154.

---. "Kapu D. Malo (Widow) to Tr. Of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints,Deed." Liber442 (16 January 1916): 278-280.

191

---. "Heber J. Grant, Trustee in Trust, to Zions Securities Corporation, Deed." Liber804 (18 December 1925): 249-257.

Hawai'i. Department of Taxation. Tax Maps Branch (1st division). Canceled Tax MapPrints (1932-6/30/1969). Box 21. Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, n.d.Microfilm 105.

---. Canceled Tax Map Prints. Box 31. Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1974.Microfilm 105.

---. Canceled Tax Map Prints. Box 38. Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1980.Microfilm 105.

Hawai'i. First Circuit Court. Compared Copy ofCriminal and Divorce Index TakenFrom General Index, All DIvisions to June 1908. Honolulu: First Circuit Court,n.d.

---. Compared Copy ofLaw Index Taken From General Index All Divisions to June1908. Honolulu: First Circuit Court, n.d.

---. Compared Copy ofLaw Index Probate and Equity Index Taken From General IndexAll Divisions to June 1908. Honolulu: First Circuit Court, n.d.

---. Index ofAll Divisions From 1908-1913. Honolulu: First Circuit Court, n.d.



---. Index ofAll Divisions From December 31, 1919 to December 31, 1923. Honolulu:First Circuit Court, n.d.

---. General Index, 1924-1981. Vol. 71. Honolulu: First Circuit Court, n.d.

---. General Index, 1982-1986. Vol 26. Honolulu: First Circuit Court, n.d.

---. Computerized Index, 1986-Present. Honolulu: First Circuit Court, n.d.

Hawai'i. Land Court. Application 772. Honolulu: Land Court, 1927.

Hawai'i. State Archives. Privy Council Records. Vol. 3 B. Honolulu, n.p., n.d.

---. First Circuit Court Equity Index 1848-1900. Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, n.d.

---. First Circuit Court Probate Index 1st Series 1848-1900. Honolulu: Hawai'i StateArchives, n.d.

---. First Circuit Court Probate Index 1901-1908. Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives,n.d.

---. First Circuit Court Law Index, 1899 to 1905 2nd Series. Honolulu: Hawai'i StateArchives, n.d.

---. First Circuit Court Law Index, 1848 to 1900. Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives,n.d.

192

---. Land Commission A wards: Numerical Index Including Testimony and Registers.Honolulu: n.p., n.d.

---. "Census Collection: 1840-1896." In Vol 2. Hawaii State Archives GovernmentRecords Inventories: Finding Aids for Hawaii Government records on File in theHawaii State Archives. Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1991.

---. "Inventory of Records for the Department of Taxation." In Vol. 11 Hawaii StateArchives Government Records Inventories: Finding Aids for Hawaii Governmentrecords on File in the Hawaii State Archives. Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives,1994.

Hobbs, Jean. Hawaii's Pageant of the Soil. Stanford, California: Stanford UniversityPress, 1935.

Ivins, Antoine R., Letter to Zions Securities Corporation, Ui'ie, 29 November 1926.

---. "Plantation History Filled With Interest Present manager Learns." HonoluluAdvertiser, Sunday 6 April 1930, 2nd ed. Hundredth Anniversary of theOrganization of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints section. 5, 8,11.

Jenson, Andrew. "History of the Hawaiian Mission of the Church of Jesus Christ ofLatter-day Saints, 1854-1860." n.p., n.d.

---. "History of the Hawaiian Mission of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,1861-1885." n.p., n.d.

---. "History of the Hawaiian Mission of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,1886-1900." n.p., n.d.

Kaleohano, Gus. Interview by Clinton Kanahele. In Interviews Conducted by ClintonKanahele, June 11, 1970 to June 29, 1970. Ui'ie: Brigham YoungUniversity-Hawai'i, n.d.

Kame'eleihiwa, Lilikala. Native Land Foreign and Foreign Desires. Honolulu: BishopMuseum Press, 1992.

Kanakanui, William I., Interview by Clinton Kanahele. In Interviews Conducted byClinton Kanahele, June 11, 1970 to June 29, 1970. Ui'ie: Brigham YoungUniversity-Hawai'i, n.d.

Kelly, Marion."The Impact of Missionaries and Other Foreigners on Hawaiians and TheirCulture." In Hawai'i: Return to Nationhood, edited by Ulla Hasager and JonathanFriedman. Haslev, Denmark: Nordisk Bogproduktion, 1991.

---. "Professor Justifies Native Anger." Ka Leo 0 Hawaii, 17 January 1992: 9-11.

Kennedy, Joseph, James Moore, and Laura Reinstema. An Archaeological Data RecoveryReport for the Proposed Kokololio Beach Park, Located at TMK: 5-5-1:54La'iemalo '0 Ahupua 'a Koolauloa District Island ofOahu revised December 1992.Haleiwa: Archaeological Consultants of Hawaii, Inc., 1992.

Kent, Noel. Hawaii Under the Influence. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1983.

193

Kingdom of Hawai'i. Statute Laws ofHis Majesty Kamehameha III: King of the HawaiianIslands; Passed by the House ofNobles and Representatives During the TwentyFirst Year ofHis Reign, and the Third and Fourth Years ofHis Public Recognition,A. D. 1845 and 1846. Vol. 1. Honolulu: Government Press, 1846.

Kingdom of Hawai' i. Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles. Buke Hoike. 13 vols.1846-1852. Reprint. Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1964.

---. Foreign Testimony. 16 vols. 1846-1853. Reprint. Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives,1964-1974.

---. Mau Palapala Hooko. 10 vols. 1846-1855. Reprint. Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives,1964.

---. Native Register. 9 vols. February 1846-March 1848. Reprint. Honolulu: Hawai'i StateArchives, 1964.

---. Register of Claims to Land. 3 vols. February 1846-September 1848. Reprint.Honolulu: Hawai'i State Archives, 1964.

Kingdom of Hawai'i. Supreme Court. In the Matters of the Guardianship of W. C.Lunalilo. Probate 2413, 1858.

Kjelstrom, Patricia I., "Iosepa Cemetery: Burial Grounds of the Golden People." Salt LakeCity. The Family History Library.

Kuykendall, Ralph S., The Hawaiian Kingdom: Foundation and Transformation.Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1938.

Kwai v Woolley. Territory of Hawai'i, Circuit Court 4888. (1902).

Lam, Maivan. "The Imposition of Anglo-American Land Tenure of Hawaiians." Journal ofLegal Pluralism and Unofficial Law 23 (1984): 103-128.

---. "The Kuleana Act Revisited: The Survival of Traditional Hawaiian Commoner Rightsin Land." Washington Law Review 64, no. 2 (April 1989): 233-288.

Lee, Cynthia. "The Doctrine of Adverse Possession." In Native Hawaiian RightsHandbook. Edited by Melody Kapilialoha MacKenzie. Honolulu: Native HawaiianLegal Corporation: Office of Hawaiian Affairs, 1991.

Levy, Neil M., "Native Hawaiian Legal Rights." California Law Review 63, no. 4 (1975):

Lind, Andrew. An Island Community: An Ecological Succession in Hawaii. New York:Greenwood Press, 1968.

"A List of Hawaiians in Utah Who Wish To Return to the Islands." F. O. & EX. Hawai'iState Archives.

Lydecker, Robert c., ed. Roster Legislatures ofHawaii, Constitutions ofMonarchy andRepublic, Speeches ofSovereigns and President. Honolulu: The Hawaiian GazetteCompany, 1918.

Lydgate, J. M., "The Vanishing Kuleana." In The Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for1915. Honolulu: Thomas G. Thrum, 1914.

194

Lyons, Curtis J., "Land Matters in Hawaii." Parts 1,4-7. The Islander 1, no. 18 (1875):103-104; no. 21 (1875): 126-127; no. 22 (1875): 135; no. 23 (1875): 143; no. 24(1875): 150-151.

Lucas, Paul. "Gathering Rights." In Native Hawaiian Rights Handbook. Edited byMelody Kapilialoha MacKenzie. Honolulu: Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation:Office of Hawaiian Affairs, 1991.

MacKenzie, Melody Kapilialoha. "Historical Background." In Native Hawaiian RightsHandbook. Edited by Melody Kapilialoha MacKenzie. Honolulu: Native HawaiianLegal Corporation: Office of Hawaiian Affairs, 1991.

Malo, David. Hawaiian Antiquities. Translated by Nathaniel Emerson. Honolulu: HawaiianGazette Company, 1903.

Maly, Kepa, and Paul H. Rosendahl. Cultural Assessment Study ofLaie WastewaterReclamation Facility (LWRF) Project: Cultural Significance of "Nioi Heiau" andOther Sites Within Its Immediate Adjoining Lands. Vol 1, Ethnogral!.hic Study forAmended Supplemental EIS Laie Wastewater Reclamation Facility (LWRF) Land ofLaie, Koolauloa District, Island ofOahu. Hilo: Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D. Inc.,1995.

Mission Administration Correspondence, 1877-1915. Historical Department of the Churchof Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Salt Lake City, Utah.

Mellen, Kathleen Dickenson. "By their fruits ...." Paradise of the Pacific 62, no. 8(August 1950): 3-5.

Moffat, Riley and Gary L. Fitzpatrick. Surveying the Mahele: Mapping the Mahele. Vol 2,Palapala 'aina. Honolulu: Editions LimIted, 1995.

Molen, Simpson Montgomery. Journal ofSimpson Montgomery Molen. Salt Lake City:Histoncal Department of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 1972.Microfilm.

Morgan, Theodore. Hawaii: A Century ofEconomic Change, 1778-1876. Vol. 83,Harvard Economic Studies. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1948.

Murakami, Alan. "Konohiki Fishing Rights and Marine Resources." In Native HawaiianRights Handbook. Edited by Melody Kapilialoha MacKenzie. Honolulu: NativeHawaiian Legal Corporation: Office of Hawaiian Affairs, 1991.

Murphy, Castle H. Collection. Brigham Young University.

Musser, J. B., "Laie - Horne Place of the Church in Hawaii." Historical Department of theChurch of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, Salt Lake City, n.d. Photocopy.

Musser, P. P., "Laie Cane and Rice Fields." Ui'ie: n.p. 1900.

Packer, Boyd K., The Holy Temple. Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ ofLatter-Day Saints, 1982.

Parker, Linda S., Native American Estate: The Struggle Over Indian and Hawaiian Lands.Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1989.

195

Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D. Inc., Archaeological Inventory Survey Laie Master PlantProject: lands ofMalaekahana and Laie Koolauloa District ofOahu. Hilo: Paul H.Rosendahl, Ph.D. Inc., 1992.

"Principles Adopted by the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles, in TheirAdjudicatIOn of Claims Presented to Them." The Polynesian, 19 June 1847, 17.

Pukui, Mary Kawena, and Samuel H. Elbert. Hawaiian Dictionary: Hawaiian-EnglishEnglish-Hawaiian. Rev. ed. Honolulu: University of Hawal'i press, 1986.

Pukui, Mary Kawena, Samuel H. Elbert, and Ester T. Mookini. Place Names ofHawaii.Rev. ed. Honolulu: The University Press of Hawai'i, 1975.

Rosenberg, Donald J., "Iosepa's Colonists Return to Hawai'i." The Tooele Bulletin(Utah), Tuesday, 24 February 1976. 1.

Schmitt, Robert c., Demographic Statistics ofHawaii: 1778-1965. Honolulu: Universityof Hawai'i Press, 1968.

---. The Missionary Censuses ofHawaii. Honolulu: Bernice P. Bishop Museum, 1973.

Smith, Joseph. "Section 89." Doctrine and Covenants of the Church ofJesus Christ ofLatter-day Saints. Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,1982.

Smith, Joseph F., Letter to O. F. Whitney, Ui'ie, 18 January 1886.

Stauffer, Robert. "Land Tenure in Kahana Hawaii, 1846-1920." Ph.D. diss., Universityof Hawai'i, 1990.

Taylor v Puakalua. Kingdom of Hawai'i. Supreme Court Case 2482. (1887).

Territory of Hawai'i. Revised Laws ofHawaii, 1925. Vol. 2 Honolulu: HonoluluStar-Bulletin, 1925.

Territory of Hawai'i. Land Court. Land Court Territory ofHawaii Map With Application1095 Map 1. Honolulu: Land Court, 1937.

Territory of Hawai'i. Office of the Commissioner of Public Lands. The Mahe1e Book.Quoted in Jon J. Chinen, The Great Mahele Hawaii's Land Division of 1848(Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1956), 16.

---. Indices ofA wards Made by the Board ofCommissioners to Quiet Land Titles in theHawaiian Islands. Honolulu: Star-Bulletin Press, 1929.

Territory of Hawai'i. Treasury Department. Taxation Maps Bureau. Map ofPortions ofLaie-Malaekahana, Koolauloa, Oahu, T. H. , First Tax District Honolulu: TaxationMaps Bureau, June 1931.

Thrum, Thomas G., The Shepherd Saint ofLanai. Honolulu: Thorn G. Thrum, 1882.

Thurston, Lorrin A. "The Monnon Mission in Hawaii." The Honolulu Advertiser, Sunday,6 April 1930, editorial section.

"To All Claimants of Land in the Hawaiian Islands." The Polynesian, 12 February 1848,146.

196

TRW Redi. Realty Atlas: State ofHawaii, First Tax Division, City and County ofHonolulu. Map volume: Zones 5-8, 30th ed. Anaheim: TRW Redi, 1996.

Tsuji, Ronald. Conversation with author, Honolulu, 11 April 1997.

Turner, A. F., "A. F. Turner's Field Book No.4 Laie." Honolulu: Survey Division, 1851.

Young, Brigham. Letter to Kamehameha V. Miscellaneous Foreign File. Hawai'i StateArchives.

Wasson, Dawn. Letter to Don W. Kleinman, Ui'ie, 29 April 1990.

---. Telephone conversation with author, 5 May 1996.

Watson, Kali. "Report for Alu Like - Adverse Possession." Alu Like, Honolulu, 1977.Photocopy.

Webb, Terry. "Profit and Prophecy: The Polynesian Cultural Center and Lil'ie's RecurrentColonialism." The Hawaiian Journal ofHistory 27 (1993): 127-150.

Woolley, Samuel E., Samuel E. Woolley, Volume 1 ofMission President. Lil'ie: Brighamyoung University-Hawai'i, n.d.

Woolley, Samuel E., Samuel E. Woolley, Volume 2 ofMission President. Lil'ie: BrighamYoung University-Hawai'i, n.d.

Woodruff v Kau. Kingdom of Hawai'i. Supreme Court Case 2960. (1891).

Zions Securities Corporation v Puuwaawaa, HI 51 (1 st Cir 1972).

Zions Securities Corporation v Polani, HI 45 (1st Cir 1972).

Zions Securities Corporation v Makaia, HI 35 (1st Cir 1972).

Zions Securities Corporation v Kukupaina, HI 115 (1st Cir 1974).

Zions Securities Corporation v Kauolani, HI 145 (1st Cir 1974).

Zions Securities Corporation v Kaaimanu, HI 319 (1st Cir 1974).

Zions Securities Corporation v Hoomana, HI 178 (1st Cir 1974).

197

THE LEGACY OFTHE 1848 MAHELE AND KULEANA ACTOF 1850

Documents

Transcript of THE LEGACY OFTHE 1848 MAHELE AND KULEANA ACTOF 1850