Insisting that the decision rested upon “legal fiction,” and that “a Congressional joint resolution is not a conveyance from a grantor to a grantee,” Mr. Sai judges himself the ultimate arbiter of law, and denies the universal legal international recognition given to the Republic of Hawaii, and the subsequent annexation which was also universally internationally recognized.  As a man who has predicated his frauds on the idea that the Kingdom of Hawaii still exists, and that he is the leader of the Kingdom (he goes by the title “Regent”), one can reasonably expect that he would be traumatized by having the basis for his “legal fiction” exposed as nonsubstantive.  Nevertheless, it is still telling that he would disparage the authority, intentions and motives of the final arbiter of law in our country.

And this is the real problem with the so-called “sovereignty movement” – it cannot withstand any decision which does not fit its agenda.  It cannot acknowledge any neutral arbitrator as the final say, if it does not end up agreeing with their side.  It cannot survive any adversarial process which may prove it wrong on the merits.  IT DOES NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY HIGHER JUDGMENT THAN ITS OWN.

When Brown v. Board of Education was decided, there were certainly those who thought it was wrongfully judged.  When Roe v. Wade was decided, there were certainly those who thought it was wrongfully judged.  However, all the parties agreed that the decision lay in the the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the United States, and as much as they may have chafed under these decisions, they were accepted as the law of the land.

The SCOTUS decision regarding the Apology Resolution gave Mr. Sai a chance to graciously accept the error of his ways.  David Sai could have simply have admitted that he interpreted PL103-150 one way, the SCOTUS interpreted it another way, and their decision is final, binding, and the law of the land.  An honorable man could have done that.  An honest man could have done that.

But like all so-called “sovereignty activists,” they can never admit error.  They can never admit being wrong.  Their entire “legal fiction” of the continued existence of the Kingdom of Hawaii (under their rule, of course), rests on the idea that they are more supreme that the Supreme Court.

PL103-150 was the culmination of decades of work by native Hawaiian victimhood activists, and enshrined into law the occupation narrative they believed justified race-based privileges and preferences in Hawai’i.  In their occupation narrative, the Kingdom of Hawai’i was a pleasant, happy and egalitarian place, comprised only of native Hawaiians.  They believe that this utopia was usurped by evil white people from the United States in 1893, when 162 armed and violent marines landed and deposed the Queen, and that ever since native Hawaiians have been downtrodden and oppressed by their white masters.  In the Apology Resolution, they found an authoritative voice for their historical revisionism, and have used PL103-150 as a lever to support their narrative in the courts and to give a rationale to their race-based agenda.

The Apology Resolution was ostensibly pursued to prop up the existing neo-ali’i class of OHA Trustees, to protect OHA’s race-based programs and to lay the groundwork for further reparations from the general public of both the State of Hawai’i and the United States.  However, PL103-150 also had the unintended side effect of giving birth to a wild and diverse independence movement, which found legitimacy in the skewed “whereas” clauses and their twisted history.  Taken to its logical conclusion, the occupation narrative demands de-occupation, and delegitimizes the multi-racial State of Hawai’i.  Very quickly after 1993 and PL103-150, con-men of various flavors began to gather about followers, and made claims to the throne of the Kingdom of Hawai’i.  Some, like David Sai, perpetrated scams that lost people their homes.  Others wrote mock constitutions, and held mock elections to claim the mantle of the Hawaiian Monarchy.  All of them threatened to divide up the people of Hawai’i based on race, and helped foster a misguided sense of victimization and an “us versus them” mentality.

Of course, the hidden truth is that the Kingdom of Hawai’i was unified by a multi-racial coalition.  The hidden truth is that the power of the ali’i waned and the power of the kama’aina has waxed over the past 200 years.  The hidden truth is that the Hawaiian Revolution of 1893 was an internal affair, and the United States marines who landed remained completely neutral throughout the overthrow.  The hidden truth is that the Republic of Hawai’i was universally recognized as the legitimate successor to the Kingdom of Hawai’i, and survived both an unfriendly United States Administration, and a ineffective rebellion in 1895.  The hidden truth is that the annexation of Hawai’i in 1898, and Statehood in 1959 were boons to the common native Hawaiian, offering them political rights they did not have during the Kingdom of Hawai’i.  The hidden truth is that the “ceded” lands were properly returned to their original owners, the multi-racial public of Hawai’i.  The hidden truth is that race-based programs in Hawai’i have no moral basis, and serve only to harm society and the ideals of justice and equality.

In a historic decision, the Supreme Court of the United States made clear that there is nothing that clouds the perfect title of the public lands of the State of Hawai’i, which are “free and clear” from “claim[s] of any nature whatsoever” as per the 1900 Organic Act.  Rejecting the earlier decision of the Supreme Court of Hawai’i, the SCOTUS made clear that the “whereas” clauses of PL103-150 were “nonsubstantive,” and that the reliance on those “whereas” clauses as law was a grave error.

Stripping away the entire foundation for race-based claims to the public lands and resources of the State of Hawai’i, the damage control on the part of native Hawaiian victimhood activists has begun.  They take refuge in the fact that the case was remanded to the Supreme Court of Hawai’i, believing that they can influence that body once again to make a decision in their favor, without realizing the strict conditions the SCOTUS has put upon any opinion they may now render.  They take refuge in the fact that their race-based programs were not directly identified or attacked by the decision, without realizing that by removing the Apology Resolution “whereas” clauses from the picture, they are now completely subject to the 14th and 15th amendments.

In the end though, the point is crystal clear – any bit of argument based on the “whereas” clauses of PL103-150 holds no weight, and stealth legislation passed in the dark of night cannot remove the equal protections given to us by the Constitution of the United States.  Race-based programs in Hawai’i will continue to be attacked on constitutional grounds, and no refuge will be found in revisionist history that fails to acknowledge the multi-racial history and legacy of Hawai’i.

The Akaka Bill, which predicates itself upon the Apology Resolution “whereas” clauses, may indeed pass through Congress, and may indeed be signed by our misinformed and politically indebted Hawaiian President, but it cannot possibly withstand the scrutiny of the courts.  OHA may manage to hold on to Kau Inoa for a few more years, and sovereignty activists may still find sympathetic judges in the lower courts to slap them lightly on the wrist when they commit felonies in myopic pursuit of their dreams, but the truth can no longer be held at bay.  Hawai’i is a sovereign State, consisting of sovereign citizens who should share equal rights with each other no matter who their ancestors may have been.

The big question now is how we move forward as Americans, and how we move forward as Hawaiians, regardless of our race or ethnicity.  Although OHA certainly has enough money to continue its fight for a good long while, and although there are hard-core sovereignty activists who will never acknowledge any adjudication other than their own, the tide has clearly turned.  In due time, all race-based programs in Hawai’i will be declared unconstitutional, and the poisonous lies of the Apology Resolution “whereas” clauses will be exposed to the public for what they are.

The dominant political machines in Hawai’i have been entrenched for decades, and they certainly won’t adjust quickly to right the wrongs they have committed in the name of the Apology Resolution.  They must make a choice though.  They must choose to accept the honor of Statehood, and the supremacy of the Constitution of the United States, or they must choose to dishonor the people of the State of Hawai’i, and continue to drive wedges between people based on race.  They cannot be both patriots and apologists for racism – the two simply cannot coexist.

By the example of PL103-150, I’d like to suggest the following “Apology Resolution Apology:”

WHEREAS, the Kingdom of Hawai’i was multi-racial from its inception;

WHEREAS, the Kingdom of Hawai’i’s first constitution declared all people, “of one blood;”

WHEREAS, the people of the Kingdom of Hawai’i overthrew their monarchy as the United States marines stood by in complete neutrality;

WHEREAS, the administration of Grover Cleveland demanded the reinstatement of the Queen based on the biased and misinformed Blount Report;

WHEREAS, Sanford Dole rightfully refused to accede to Cleveland’s unlawful interference in the domestic affairs of the Kingdom of Hawai’i and its Provisional Government;

WHEREAS, Grover Cleveland referred the matter of the Hawaiian Revolution of 1893 to the “broader authority and discretion” of Congress;

WHEREAS, after a bi-partisan investigation with testimony under oath, the Morgan Report of February 26, 1894 factually repudiated the mistaken conclusions of the Blount Report;

WHEREAS, the Republic of Hawai’i was declared on July 4, 1894, and was recognized as the legitimate successor of the Kingdom of Hawai’i by every nation in the world ever to have diplomatic relations with the Kingdom of Hawai’i;

WHEREAS, the Republic of Hawai’i was a sovereign, independent nation that had robust international diplomatic relations, and survived an ineffective rebellion in 1895;

WHEREAS, in 1897 the Republic of Hawai’i adopted a Treaty of Annexation offering among other things, to cede to the United States its sovereignty and absolute fee and ownership of all public lands, including the former crown lands;

WHEREAS, in 1898, by the Newlands Resolution, the United States accepted the offer of annexation and Hawai’i was annexed to the United states and absolute fee and ownership of all public lands was vested in the United States;

WHEREAS, the Organic Act of 1900 established the government of the Territory of Hawai’i and reiterated that its lands consist of the lands the United States had acquired under the Newlands Resolution, free and clear from any claims of any nature whatsoever;

WHEREAS, the government of the Territory of Hawai’i was dominated by native Hawaiians for many decades after annexation, including the first two Congressional Representatives, Robert Wilcox and Prince Kuhio;

WHEREAS, the people of Hawai’i, of all races, pursued Statehood throughout the Territorial period;

WHEREAS, in 1959, in an election with the highest voter turnout in the history of Hawai’i, the people of Hawai’i, of all races and ethnicities, voted overwhelmingly for Statehood;

WHEREAS, in 1959, Hawai’i became the 50th State of the Union, and the “ceded” lands were returned to the multi-racial public of the State of Hawai’i by the Admissions Act;

WHEREAS, in 1973, native Hawaiian victimhood activists decided to pursue a settlement similar to the Alaskan Native Claims Settlement Act, in pursuit of money and power regardless of the completely different histories of the Alaskan Natives and native Hawaiians;

WHEREAS, in 1978, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs was created with the best of intentions;

WHEREAS, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs became a corrupt and indefensible bastion of race-based programs and privileges;

WHEREAS, the 1983 Native Hawaiians Study Commission Report was pursued by native Hawaiian victimhood activists, but instead repudiated their claims for race-based reparations;

WHEREAS, in 1993, on the anniversary of the Hawaiian Revolution of 1893, the Apology Resolution (PL103-150) was passed to undermine the factual findings of the Native Hawaiians Study Commission Report, and provide a basis for race-based reparations;

WHEREAS, in 2000, Rice v. Cayetano was decided, and voting for OHA trustees was opened to people of all races and ethnicities;

WHEREAS, on December 31, 2002, Arakaki v. Hawaii was decided, and running for OHA trustee office was opened to people of all races and ethnicities;

WHEREAS, since 2000, the Akaka Bill has been presented in Congress as an attempt to avoid equal protection challenges to race-based programs in Hawai’i;

WHEREAS, the Akaka Bill was predicated upon PL103-150;

WHEREAS, on March 31, 2009, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed that the “whereas” clauses of PL103-150 are “nonsubstantive;”

BE IT RESOLVED that all race-based qualification for government programs be removed from all laws of the State of Hawai’i; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all State of Hawai’i politicians who ever supported race-based privileges should apologize to the races and ethnicities they have discriminated against, and affirm to all the people of the State of Hawai’i that they will enjoy equal rights and equal treatment under the law, regardless of race or ethnicity; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all Federal politicians who ever supported race-based privileges should apologize to the races and ethnicities they have discriminated against, and affirm to all the people of the State of Hawai’i that they will enjoy equal rights and equal treatment under the law, regardless of race or ethnicity; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any pursuit of race-based privileges or programs in the State of Hawai’i be considered a poisonous stain upon the noble heritage of the native Hawaiian people and all their ancestors who embraced all other people as fellow humans, equal in worth and rights; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that certified copies of this Concurrent Resolution, the complete three volume set of Kuykendall’s “Hawaiian Kingdom,” Ernest Andrade’s “Unconquerable Rebel,” Thurston Twigg-Smith’s “Hawaiian Sovereignty: Do the facts matter?,” and Dr. Kenneth Conklin’s “Hawaiian Apartheid” be transmitted to every State of Hawai’i legislator, every United States Senator, every United States Congressional Representative, all living presidents, each member of any Hawaiian Studies or related program in the University of Hawaii, and every former or current OHA trustee.

Jere Krischel, civil rights activist

As the final days count down to your inauguration, I would like to share with you one very specific hope and its corollary fear I have.  Throughout your campaign, although I did not support your candidacy, I greatly admired your rhetoric on race and race relations.  As the first “hapa” president, although you and I don’t share specific bloodlines, we do share the experience of being built and raised struggling with the idea of whether or not we were “half” this or “half” that, or a “whole” something else.  I believe the answer we both arrived at is that we are “whole” people, and that beyond “black” and “white” we are both in fact “human.”

One of the primary reasons why I opposed your candidacy was your support for the Akaka Bill, aka the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act.  You spoke on the floor before a cloture vote on the Akaka Bill put forth by both Dan Inouye and Dan Akaka, and acting as the “third Hawaiian Senator,” you spoke in strong support of their bill.  This despite the fact that the Akaka Bill promises to divide our homeland, the State of Hawaii, into two governments, solely on the basis of race.  I imagine that your support of the Akaka Bill was politically expedient, but I hope that it was not in fact based on a thoughtful contemplation of the issue.

I would like for you to imagine for a moment that your mother was native Hawaiian, and had ancestors going back before 1778 in the Hawaiian Islands.  Also imagine that your father had never left your mother, and lived with you in Hawaii during your entire time there.  Now imagine telling your father that he wasn’t allowed to vote in an election that you and your mom could vote in.  Imagine telling your father that he wasn’t allowed to serve in an elected office that you and your mom could serve in.  Imagine telling your father that you and your mother had “rights” that he was not allowed to have.

This is the exact scenario that promises to play out if the Akaka Bill becomes law.  A group of “experts” will decide who is and who is not “Hawaiian” by race, and this group will be asked to institute a government that will attempt to negotiate rights and resources away from the rest of the public of the State of Hawaii.  It may turn out that the State of Hawaii legislature will resist attempts to take over public lands and put them into the hands of a single race-based government.  But it may also turn out that the State of Hawaii legislature will be co-opted by the unregulated donations available to them from members of this new race-based government, and will be a willing participant in the reallocation of land and resources based solely on race.

As a fellow hapa-haole, born and raised in Hawaii as you were, educated at Punahou as you were, I beg you to turn towards those who are still promoting the Akaka Bill, and with all the grand rhetoric at your disposal, demand that they abandon their attempts to divide us as a people based on race.  Insist to them that we are “One America.”  Insist to them that we are “One People.”  Insist to them that we should all live under “One Law.”  Make a note of the first constitution of the Kingdom of Hawaii, which nobly declared that all people were “of one blood.”  Let them know that as a hapa-haole, born and raised in Hawaii, you have just as much, if not more right to claim the islands as your homeland as some toe-nail native Hawaiian who was born and raised on the mainland.  Quote from Martin Luther King, Jr.’s speech, and demand that we should be judged on the content of our character, not the color of our skin.  Move them with your sincere belief that we are all human, first and foremost, and that arbitrary racial distinctions do NOT make the man.

I know that your first days in office will be tumultuous ones, with the Middle East burning, the economy tanking, and the various special interests groups pounding on your door for their pound of flesh.  But if you could please take the time to make a strong stand against racial division as one of the first acts of your office, you could help heal the wounds in the State of Hawaii that have festered for the past 30 years of the race-based experiment called OHA.  You have the background, the charisma and the credibility to demand that everyone should be treated equally, regardless of race.  You could change the face of Hawaii politics, and move us away from division and towards conciliation with a single, moving speech.

Please, Mr. Obama, give us the hope you promised.

Mahalo,

Jere Krischel, civil rights activist

Gibson’s rise to power came to a sudden stop with the 1887 Constitution of the Kingdom of Hawaii, when Kalakaua was forced by local politicians to curtail his own powers. Although Gibson was exiled, and died shortly after, the seeds of race-based politics he planted continued to infect the governments of Hawaii. Not until the late 20th century did these seeds begin sprouting in earnest.

Though his “I have a dream” speech still resonates, there has been an unfortunate twisting of Dr. Martin Luther King’s dream of civil rights and equality, embodied in the modern ethnic “rights” movements which insist on special privilege for separate groups. This has been particularly vivid with the so-called “native Hawaiian rights” activists. Encouraged by the 1971 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, which provided one billion dollars in cash and over forty-four million acres of land to 80,000 native Alaskans, these activists began a deliberate process of infiltrating academia and rewriting inconvenient history to their ultimate goal of race-based reparations and separatism.

In spite of well researched and impartial historical foundations, including the works of noted historians such as Ralph S. Kuykendall, Gavan Daws and William Adam Russ, Jr., a steady stream of propaganda promoting the idea of native Hawaiian victimhood has been published since the early 70’s. Having lost prominence and power in government after World War II and the enfranchisement of Japanese voters (who in the early 1900’s Territorial period were not able to vote), this propaganda found a receptive audience in a politically frustrated native Hawaiian community. Unbeknownst to most observers at the time, alongside the Hawaiian Renaissance of cultural rediscovery, which we in Hawaii are rightfully proud of, came a more insidious specter of racial separatism.

The native Hawaiian victimhood industry, preying upon the ignorance of the general public of both Hawaii and the mainland, made great strides in consolidating power and influence in the hands of an elite few over the past four decades. In 1978, OHA was created – ostensibly a state agency to service “Native Hawaiians” as defined by the 1921 Hawaiian Homes Commission Act (50% and above). Since 1978, OHA has instead become a hotbed of corruption, patronage and privilege. It has expanded its bank account balance, reach and influence not only to the detriment of the “Native Hawaiians” it was created to serve, but also to the detriment of the general public of Hawaii, which has seen hundreds of millions of dollars of tax revenue funneled away from public schools and services and into the hands and control of these neo-ali’i.

The premise of this industry is simple – so long as native Hawaiians can be seen as poor and downtrodden, and the blame can be placed on their peers and neighbors, money can be taken from the public of Hawaii and put into the hands of a new royalty. This royal money translates into power over the common people of all races, both in terms of funding or not funding community projects, but also in terms of direct lobbying for further concessions from federal, state and local governments. With over 400 million dollars in the bank, OHA has an amazing amount of influence over the Hawaii State Legislature, and has spent millions of dollars lobbying our United States Senate and House of Representatives as well.

The psychology of blaming other ethnic groups for one’s own problems is by no means unique to Hawaii politics, nor even to this particular day and age. People have been pointing the finger since time immemorial, and distinguishing between “us” and “them” is nearly as natural as breathing. However, this particular behavior and attitude is especially repugnant and destructive in such a thoroughly integrated and racially mixed society as the one we have in Hawaii.

The basic premise of asserting the need for special ethnic “rights” generally goes like this – being a member of a given ethnic group, one is confronted by systemic prejudice throughout life. Other people are assumed to judge you to be part of some disdained ethnicity, and the only way to rectify this injustice is to counter this systemic prejudice with institutionalized prejudice in favor of your ethnic group. In simpler terms, if you look native Hawaiian, and people tend to treat native Hawaiians worse than other people, then we must fight that by giving all native Hawaiians a special boost to make up for it.

However, the fact is that most “native Hawaiians” are not mostly native Hawaiian. The vast majority of “native Hawaiians” are only ambiguously identified as such by appearance or by name. “Native Hawaiians” run the gamut of looking very dark, very light, to a host of other stereotypical appearances commonly associated with every ethnicity or nationality found in the world. Hawaiian names are common to children of all ethnicities in Hawaii, and are even used elsewhere in the United States. With these “native Hawaiians” indistinguishable from other Hawaiians, the premise for special ethnic privileges becomes obviously unfounded, illegitimate and unjust.

Not to mention the fact that there is no systemic disdain for native Hawaiians in either the State of Hawaii, nor the other forty nine states of the Union. On the contrary, there is an almost New Age worship of people with the slightest degree of native Hawaiian ancestry, and a tremendous respect for the beautiful culture and environmental values associated with our idealized image of native Hawaiians. Although we can certainly look back at events in the last century, such as the Massie Trial in 1932, as indicative of a poisonous racial prejudice against native Hawaiians, the people and attitudes expressed in such historical moments are as dead and gone as the human sacrifice, slavery and misogyny practiced by native Hawaiians under the kapu religion. Assuming that all Americans not of native Hawaiian ancestry disdain native Hawaiians because some white Americans in the early 20th century did is as silly as assuming that Daniel Akaka believes that any woman eating bananas or coconuts should be subject to capital punishment.

A watershed moment in the appeasement of radical race-based sovereignty activists came in 1993 with the passage of the so-called “Apology Resolution”. In a sweeping stroke of historical revisionism, the Kingdom of Hawaii was haphazardly and ignorantly transformed from a multi-ethnic and multi-racial country, to a country simply for the benefit of ethnic native Hawaiians. Whereas the very first constitution of the Hawaiian Kingdom declared all men to be “of one blood”, the Apology Resolution disregarded and disenfranchised the multitudes of non-native Hawaiians who were part and parcel of the creation, governance and general populace of Hawaii.

In a speech given on September 4, 1999, Senator Daniel Akaka made clear his reasons for promoting this twisting of history – “to neutralize the 1983 Native Hawaiians Study Commission’s Majority Report conclusion that the U.S. government was not liable for the loss of sovereignty or lands of the Hawaiian people in the 1893 overthrow.” Rather than accept the well researched and studied opinion put forth by the most comprehensive government review regarding the history of the 1893 Hawaiian Revolution, politicians such as Senator Akaka have used every method possible to muddy the waters of historical record which have contradicted their premises for race-based privilege.

Since the passage of the “Apology Resolution”, and the success of several civil rights cases in opposition to the racial separatism and privilege promoted by OHA, the Akaka Bill, or Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act, has been pushed year after year in Congress. Written explicitly to protect existing race-based programs from equal protection civil rights lawsuits, the Akaka Bill has attempted and failed to walk a thin line between appeasing sovereignty activists, and radicalizing them. They have used the same arguments, and twisted the same history as the more radical race-based sovereignty activists, but have tried to position themselves as being a moderate middle between the abolition of race-based criteria in government social programs, and the secession of Hawaii and transformation into a sovereign race-based government.

This attempt to have their cake and eat it too is the direct cause for the unrest we have seen at Iolani Palace for the past year, and promises only to encourage more violence and hatred. We cannot assert that native Hawaiians were the sole victims of the overthrow of Queen Liliuokalani, and that the U.S. was to blame, and offer only a half-measure of justice. These radical race-based activists are simply listening to the arguments made by OHA ali’i and other native Hawaiian victimhood politicians, and taking them to their logical conclusion.

We know that the heavy hitters trying to preserve race-based programs in Hawaii don’t believe their own arguments – if they did they would be joining James Kimo Akahi and his cohorts at Iolani Palace. It is morally imperative that they cease and desist their dishonest and destructive propaganda, and make clear the following three incontrovertible truths:

1) The State of Hawaii is the legitimate government of all the people of Hawaii and there is no question under either local, state, federal or international law as to its legality;

2) Native Hawaiians are not victims requiring special reparations, additional privileges or a separate government;

3) All Hawaiians, regardless of ancestry, deserve equal protection under the law and equal consideration by the government.

He Hawai’i au; he mau Hawai’i kakou a pau – I am Hawaiian; we are all Hawaiians. The sooner our politicians give up their machinations for power based on race-based institutions, the sooner we will be free from the unintended consequences of historical revisionism and racial pandering. Kamehameha the Great, who unified the Hawaiian Islands with a multi-racial coalition including luminaries such as his son-in-law John Young, from Britain, and Don Marin, from Spain, would certainly challenge any presumption that he was a victim, or in need of special assistance. To honor Kamehameha’s wisdom and legacy, we must rededicate ourselves to be active participants in a thriving Hawaii, where race or ethnicity simply has no place in the spirit of aloha.

Jere Krischel
Senior Fellow
Grassroot Institute of Hawaii

The power point presentation in PDF format of Jere Krischel’s presentation is available here.

Mr. Suburo Fujii, Agent and Consul General of Japan, sent a letter of de facto recognition, in English language, to Hawaii President Dole, dated January 19, 1893. Apparently the Japanese consulate continued the same level of relations with the Provisional Government, and later the Republic, as it had maintained with the Kingdom. It is unclear whether the subsequent establishment of the Republic resulted in a formal letter of recognition de jure like the ones given by at least nineteen other nations. No such letter can be found in the archives of the State of Hawaii. But it would be surprising if Japan had failed to recognize the Republic, because there were tens of thousands of Japanese nationals working as contract laborers on Hawaii’s sugar plantations at the time of the revolution, and there was no break in further arrivals.

Ken Conklin contacted Ms. Harumi Katsumata, Consul, Consulate-General of Japan in Hawaii, inquiring whether there might be a record of diplomatic recognition of the Republic either in the files of the Japanese Consulate in Honolulu or in the foreign affairs archives in Tokyo. Following a period of several weeks for research, Consul Katsumata sent an e-mail stating that there is no information about Japan’s recognition of the Republic of Hawaii, either in Honolulu or in Tokyo. However, she did attach a photograph (shown below) of a notice published by the Republic of Hawaii Foreign Office on April 24, 1897. The notice announced that the Consulate of Japan was being upgraded to the status of Legation and that the Consul currently serving at that time would continue to represent Japan. The published notice included the full text of an “autograph letter of His Majesty the Emperor” to President Dole, announcing the upgrade of status, bearing the manual seal of the Empire and countersigned by the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Thus it is clear that until April 24, 1897 the Republic enjoyed the same level of diplomatic relations with Japan that the Kingdom had previously enjoyed; and after that date Japan granted even higher status to the Republic by upgrading its Consulate to a Legation. The wording of the Emperor’s letter to President Dole is very similar to the wording of the letters of recognition de jure that had been sent by other Emperors, Kings, Queens, and Presidents.

In March of 1881 King Kalakaua had visited the Meiji Emperor of Japan (Mutsuhito) on his trip around the world, and awarded to the Emperor the highest Royal Order of the Hawaiian Kingdom — the Grand Cross of the Royal Order of Kamehameha with collar.  Thus it is especially poignant when that same Emperor personally signs a letter to Hawaii President Sanford Dole raising the status of Japan’s diplomatic representation from consulate to legation.  The Emperor was giving high status to the Republic — a revolutionary government which had overthrown a fellow monarchy which had previously awarded the Emperor its highest honor.

Click once or twice on the photo to zoom in for more detail.

By Authority

Foreign Office Notice

This day had audience of the President, Mr. R.
Shimamura, His Imperial Japanese Majesty’s
Diplomatic Agent and Consul General, who
presented his credentials from His Majesty the
Emperor, accrediting him in the capacity of
Minister Resident, in the Republic of Hawaii.

In presenting the autograph letter of His Majesty
the Emperor, Mr. Shimamura said:

Mr. President: The Consulate General of Japan in
Hawaii has been raised to the rank of Legation;
and it has pleased His Imperial Majesty, My
August Master, to designate me as His Minister
Resident, to reside in the Republic of Hawaii.

Permit me, Mr. President, in presenting my
credentials, to express my sincere appreciation
of the personal and official courtesies, hitherto
extended to me, both by yourself and by the
officials of your Government in my capacity of
Consul General and Diplomatic Agent; and I
express the hope and belief that these pleasant
personal and official amenities may be continued
in my new and more extended relations with your
government.

I avail myself of this occasion to assure you of
my sincere desire for your future health and
welfare.

To which the President replied:

“It is gratifying to me, Mr. Minister, that your
Government, in view of the large number of your
countrymen who are resident here, has seen fit to
raise the Consulate General of Japan in Hawaii to
the rank of Legation. And it is very acceptable
to me and this government that His Imperial
Majesty has designated yourself, whom we have so
long and so favorably known both officially and
socially, as the one to receive this high
appointment.

“I thank you for your expressions of good will to
myself personally, and I ask you to convey to
your Government our satisfaction over its action
in increasing the importance of the office
representing it in this country, and to His
Imperial Majesty my good wishes for his continued
health and for the prosperity of the nation over
which he so ably presides.

“I congratulate you, Mr. Minister, upon your
promotion.”

The autograph letter of His Majesty is as
follows:

MUTSUHITO

By the grace of Heaven, emperor of Japan and
seated on the throne occupied by the same Dynasty
from time immemorial,

TO MR. SANFORD B. DOLE, PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC
OF HAWAII, and Our Great and Good Friend,
Greeting!

Being animated by the desire to maintain and
promote the relations of friendship and good
understanding so happily existing between our
respective countries, We do hereby appoint
Shimamura, Hisashi, Jugoi, Fourth Class of the
Imperial Order of the Rising Sun, who is at
present residing in your country, in the capacity
of our Consul General and Diplomatic Agent, to be
our Minister Resident, to reside in the Republic
of Hawaii.

From a knowledge of his fidelity, assiduity and
intelligence, We have entire confidence that he
will render himself acceptable to You and We
request that You will give full credence to
whatever he shall say in Our name.

We take this opportunity to assure You of Our
most sincere friendship and of Our ardent wishes
for Your health and welfare.

Given at Our Palace in Tokio, this 6th day of the
4th month of the 30th year of Meiji,
corresponding to the two thousand five hundred
and fifty-seventh year from the Coronation of the
Emperor Jimmu.

(Sign — Manual)
(Seal of the Empire).
(Countersigned) Count Okuma Shigenobu,
Minister for Foreign Affairs.
—-
S.M. Damon,
Minister of Foreign Affairs ad interim.
Foreign Office April 24, 1897.

U.S. President Grover Cleveland personally signed an official letter giving full diplomatic recognition to the Republic of Hawaii.

Unfortunately the original signed and sealed copy of that letter cannot be found in the Archives of the State of Hawaii. However, there are several other letters in the archives signed by officials of the U.S. and Hawaii proving that Grover Cleveland’s original signed and sealed letter was in fact delivered to President Dole by appointment at a meeting of the Executive Council of the Republic of Hawaii.

Click on the photos to zoom in for more detail.

Tentative U.S. recognition of Republic of Hawaii: Four-page letter dated July 5, 1894 from Albert S. Willis, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary for the United States, to Sanford B. Dole, President of the Republic of Hawaii, received by him July 6. The letter acknowledges the receipt of notification that the Constitution has been established and the President and Cabinet have been installed. This letter gives the same (de facto) recognition to the Republic which had previously been given to the Provisional Government, and says that the matter will be referred to President Grover Cleveland for further action.

Letter dated July 6, 1894 from U.S. Consul General Ellis Mills to Hawaii Minister of Foreign Affairs Francis M. Hatch acknowledging the receipt of a letter from the Hawaii Minister informing the U.S. of the creation of the Republic of Hawaii.

Two-page letter dated August 8, 1894 from U.S. Secretary of State Gresham to U.S. Minister Willis approving his action of “carrying out the long approved rule of the United States of entering into relations with the authorities of an unopposed government.”

File cover dated August 25, 1894 whose title is “Announcing receipt of autograph letter from President Cleveland and asking for an appointment to deliver same.”

Requesting an appointment to present to President Dole the sealed original of President Cleveland’s letter recognizing the Republic of Hawaii. This is an original letter containing two paragraphs, on letterhead stationery “Legation of the United States” dated August 25, 1894, from U.S. Minister Willis to Hawaii Minister of Foreign Affairs Hatch saying “In accordance with instructions from Hon. W.L. Gresham, Secretary of State, I inclose office-copy of a letter from the President of the United States to His Excellency Sanford B. Dole President of Hawaii in response to his letter announcing the establishment of that Government and his assumption of the office of President thereof. It will give me pleasure to deliver the sealed original to President Dole, at such time and place as he may indicate.”

File cover entitled: “Address of Albert S. Willis U.S. Minister on presentation of autograph letter of President Cleveland”

One-page document which is the speech given by U.S. Minister Willis to President Dole and the Executive Council of the Republic of Hawaii upon presenting to them the letter of formal recognition from President Grover Cleveland.

Original of cover letter accompanying sealed original of President Cleveland’s letter recognizing the Republic of Hawaii.. The cover letter, dated August 25, 1894, contains only one paragraph on letterhead of “Legation of the United States” from Albert S. Willis, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary for the United States, to Hawaii Minister of Foreign Affairs Francis M. Hatch. The paragraph says: “I have the honor to inclose herewith copy of extract from dispatch from the Hon. W.L. Gresham of the 8th instant in regard to the recognition of Hawaii.”

U.S. President Grover Cleveland’s letter of recognition of the Republic of Hawaii — typewritten “office copy” referred to in earlier documents. Contents follow.

Grover Cleveland
President of the United States of America

To his Excellency
Sanford B. Dole,
President of the Republic of Hawaii.

Great and Good Friend:–

I have received your letter of the 7th ultimo, by which you announce the establishment and proclamation of the Republic of Hawaii on the Fourth day of July, 1894, and your assumption of the office of President with all the formalities prescribed by the Constitution thereof.

I cordially reciprocate the sentiments you express for the continuance of the friendly relations which have existed between the United States and the Hawaiian Islands, and assure you of my best wishes for your personal prosperity.

Written at Washington the 7th day of August, 1894.

Your Good Friend:
GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
W.Q. Gresham,
Secretary of State.

Original of a two-page letter from Switzerland, in French, dated September 11, 1894, to President Sanford B. Dole, recognizing the Republic of Hawaii. The letter was signed by the Swiss federal counsel [Attorney General] on behalf of the President of the Swiss Confederation, and also countersigned by the Chancellor of the Swiss Confederation. The Swiss Foreign Minister [Secretary of State] also sent a cover letter to his Hawaiian counterpart (Minister of Foreign Affairs Francis M. Hatch) to accompany the letter to President Dole. No English translations have survived.

Click on the photos to zoom in for more detail.

Swiss letter of recognition:

Foreign Minister letter:

Don Alfonso XIII, King of Spain, and Dona Maria Christina, Regent Queen of Spain, both personally signed a joint one-page letter in Spanish to Sanford B. Dole on November 26, 1894, recognizing the Republic of Hawaii. There was a one-page English translation. The Foreign Ministry of Spain sent an accompanying two-page cover letter in Spanish to Hawaiian Minister of Foreign Affairs Francis M. Hatch, for which no English translation survives.

Click on the photos to zoom in for more detail.

King and Queen letter:

English translation:

Foreign Ministry accompanying letter:

Tsar Alexander III of Russia personally signed a letter to President Dole, in Russian, dated August 26, 1894, recognizing the Republic of Hawaii. There is a two-page translation into French, but no English translation.

In 1883 Tsar Alexander III had his coronation.  That ceremony was attended by Col. Curtis P. Iaukea, who was sent by King Kalakaua as envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary.  On orders of the King, Minister Iaukea presented to Tsar Alexander III the highest Royal Order of the Hawaiian Kingdom — the Grand Cross of the Royal Order of Kamehameha with collar.  Thus it is an especially powerful diplomatic statement when that same Tsar personally signs a letter to Hawaii President Sanford Dole granting recognition de jure to the Republic as the rightful government of Hawaii — a revolutionary Republic which had overthrown the Tsar’s fellow monarch, Queen Liliuokalani, who was Kalakaua’s sister.

Click on the photos to zoom in for more detail.

Original two-page letter in Russian:

Translation of 2-page letter into French:

File cover: