Difference between revisions of "Template:Nhsc-v1-353"

From GrassrootWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
 
 
Line 1: Line 1:
13/ In a draft alternate to this
+
<u>13</u>/ In a draft alternate to this
 
chapter, OHA comments that the native
 
chapter, OHA comments that the native
 
Hawaiians are "not asserting
 
Hawaiians are "not asserting
Line 9: Line 9:
 
lands passed into fee simple ownership
 
lands passed into fee simple ownership
 
before 1898 (see discussion, above,
 
before 1898 (see discussion, above,
page 335 to 336, and Levy, Native
+
page 335 to 336, and Levy, <u>Native
Hawaiian Land Rights, 63 Calif. L.
+
Hawaiian Land Rights</u>, 63 Calif. L.
 
Rev. 848, 859 (1975)).
 
Rev. 848, 859 (1975)).
14/ The requirement of a single
+
 
 +
<u>14</u>/ The requirement of a single
 
landowning entity is discussed fully
 
landowning entity is discussed fully
 
in the cases cited below in footnote
 
in the cases cited below in footnote
 
15.
 
15.
15/ Confederated Tribes of the
+
 
Warm Springs Reservation v. United
+
<u>15</u>/ <u>Confederated Tribes of the
States, 177 Ct.Cl. 184, 206-207
+
Warm Springs Reservation</u> v. <u>United
(1966); Nooksack Tribe v. United
+
States</u>, 177 Ct.Cl. 184, 206-207
States, 3 Ind.Cl.Comm. 479, 494-495
+
(1966); <u>Nooksack Tribe</u> v. <u>United
(1955), aff'd, 162 Ct.Cl. 712 (1963),
+
States</u>, 3 Ind.Cl.Comm. 479, 494-495
cert, denied, 375 U.S. 993 (1964); and
+
(1955), <u>aff'd</u>, 162 Ct.Cl. 712 (1963),
Muckleshoot Tribe v. United States, 3
+
<u>cert. denied</u>, 375 U.S. 993 (1964); and
 +
<u>Muckleshoot Tribe</u> v. <u>United States</u>, 3
 
Ind.Cl.Comm. 658, 674-675 (1955),
 
Ind.Cl.Comm. 658, 674-675 (1955),
aff'd in part, vacated in part on
+
<u>aff'd in part, vacated in part on
other grounds, 174 Ct.Cl. 1283 (1966),
+
other grounds</u>, 174 Ct.Cl. 1283 (1966),
cert, denied, 385 U.S. 847 (1966).
+
<u>cert. denied</u>, 385 U.S. 847 (1966).
j_6/ Levy, p. 859.
+
 
17/ Jon J. Chinen, The Great
+
<u>16</u>/ Levy, p. 859.
Mahele; Hawaii's Land Division of 1848
+
 
 +
<u>17</u>/ Jon J. Chinen, <u>The Great
 +
Mahele; Hawaii's Land Division of 1848</u>
 
(Honolulu: The University Press of
 
(Honolulu: The University Press of
 
Hawaii, 1974), p. 5.
 
Hawaii, 1974), p. 5.
18/ Gavan Daws, Shoal of Time; A
+
 
History of the Hawaiian Islands, (New
+
<u>18</u>/ Gavan Daws, <u>Shoal of Time; A
 +
History of the Hawaiian Islands</u>, (New
 
York: The MacMillan Company, 1968),
 
York: The MacMillan Company, 1968),
 
pp. 124-5; see also above, chapter
 
pp. 124-5; see also above, chapter
 
entitled "Diplomatic and Congressional
 
entitled "Diplomatic and Congressional
 
History: From Monarchy to Statehood."
 
History: From Monarchy to Statehood."
19/ Morris, The Land System of
+
 
Hawaii, 21 ABA Journal 649, 650
+
<u>19</u>/ Morris, <u>The Land System of
 +
Hawaii</u>, 21 ABA Journal 649, 650
 
(1935).
 
(1935).
20/ Levy, pp. 854-855.
+
 
21/ Some commenters objected to
+
<u>20</u>/ Levy, pp. 854-855.
 +
 
 +
<u>21</u>/ Some commenters objected to
 
the use of feudal terms in referring
 
the use of feudal terms in referring
 
to native Hawaiians* land ownership
 
to native Hawaiians* land ownership
Line 50: Line 58:
 
Hawaiians in understanding land
 
Hawaiians in understanding land
 
ownership patterns.
 
ownership patterns.
22/ Levy, pp. 855-857. The paper
+
 
 +
<u>22</u>/ Levy, pp. 855-857. The paper
 
submitted to the Commission by the
 
submitted to the Commission by the
 
Office of Hawaiian Affairs, "Regarding
 
Office of Hawaiian Affairs, "Regarding
 
the Legal Aspects," written by Melody
 
the Legal Aspects," written by Melody
 
MacKenzie and Jon Van Dyke, contends
 
MacKenzie and Jon Van Dyke, contends
that although the Kuleana Act allowed
+
that although the <u>Kuleana</u> Act allowed
 
individual native Hawaiians to obtain
 
individual native Hawaiians to obtain
 
fee simple title to Crown or
 
fee simple title to Crown or
Line 67: Line 76:
 
paper is reproduced in its entirety in
 
paper is reproduced in its entirety in
 
the Appendix of this Report.
 
the Appendix of this Report.
23/ Daws, p. 124.
+
 
24/ Levy, p. 857.
+
<u>23</u>/ Daws, p. 124.
25/ Ibid., p. 859.
+
 
26/ Ibid.
+
<u>24</u>/ Levy, p. 857.
27/ Ibid., p. 852, note 26.
+
 
28/ H. Rodger Betts, Report on the
+
<u>25</u>/ <u>Ibid</u>., p. 859.
Hawaiian Native Claims, Second Draft
+
 
 +
<u>26</u>/ <u>Ibid</u>.
 +
 
 +
<u>27</u>/ <u>Ibid</u>., p. 852, note 26.
 +
 
 +
<u>28</u>/ H. Rodger Betts, <u>Report on the
 +
Hawaiian Native Claims</u>, Second Draft
 
(1978), p. 15. One comment received
 
(1978), p. 15. One comment received
 
by the Commission states that the 1840
 
by the Commission states that the 1840
Line 79: Line 94:
 
Hawaiians had aboriginal title to the
 
Hawaiians had aboriginal title to the
 
Government and Crown lands.
 
Government and Crown lands.
29/ Chinen, The Great Mahele, pp.
+
 
 +
<u>29</u>/ Chinen, <u>The Great Mahele</u>, pp.
 
25-29. Betts concedes that the lands
 
25-29. Betts concedes that the lands
 
at issue did not encompass 2,500,000
 
at issue did not encompass 2,500,000
Line 89: Line 105:
 
states that the lands at issue total
 
states that the lands at issue total
 
1.75 million acres.
 
1.75 million acres.
353
+
{{p|353}}

Latest revision as of 00:38, 7 May 2006

13/ In a draft alternate to this chapter, OHA comments that the native Hawaiians are "not asserting aboriginal title claims to Government and Crown lands which passed into fee simple ownership" (OHA's Comments, Alternate Chapter III, p. 7.) About 720,000 acres of Government and Crown lands passed into fee simple ownership before 1898 (see discussion, above, page 335 to 336, and Levy, Native Hawaiian Land Rights, 63 Calif. L. Rev. 848, 859 (1975)).

14/ The requirement of a single landowning entity is discussed fully in the cases cited below in footnote 15.

15/ Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation v. United States, 177 Ct.Cl. 184, 206-207 (1966); Nooksack Tribe v. United States, 3 Ind.Cl.Comm. 479, 494-495 (1955), aff'd, 162 Ct.Cl. 712 (1963), cert. denied, 375 U.S. 993 (1964); and Muckleshoot Tribe v. United States, 3 Ind.Cl.Comm. 658, 674-675 (1955), aff'd in part, vacated in part on other grounds, 174 Ct.Cl. 1283 (1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 847 (1966).

16/ Levy, p. 859.

17/ Jon J. Chinen, The Great Mahele; Hawaii's Land Division of 1848 (Honolulu: The University Press of Hawaii, 1974), p. 5.

18/ Gavan Daws, Shoal of Time; A History of the Hawaiian Islands, (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1968), pp. 124-5; see also above, chapter entitled "Diplomatic and Congressional History: From Monarchy to Statehood."

19/ Morris, The Land System of Hawaii, 21 ABA Journal 649, 650 (1935).

20/ Levy, pp. 854-855.

21/ Some commenters objected to the use of feudal terms in referring to native Hawaiians* land ownership patterns. The terms are used here to assist those who are not native Hawaiians in understanding land ownership patterns.

22/ Levy, pp. 855-857. The paper submitted to the Commission by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, "Regarding the Legal Aspects," written by Melody MacKenzie and Jon Van Dyke, contends that although the Kuleana Act allowed individual native Hawaiians to obtain fee simple title to Crown or Government lands that they actually cultivated or Government lands they purchased, it did not extinguish the "people's" interest in the Crown and Government lands. See the discussion above, pages 335 to 336, and footnote 13, above. The MacKenzie/Van Dyke paper is reproduced in its entirety in the Appendix of this Report.

23/ Daws, p. 124.

24/ Levy, p. 857.

25/ Ibid., p. 859.

26/ Ibid.

27/ Ibid., p. 852, note 26.

28/ H. Rodger Betts, Report on the Hawaiian Native Claims, Second Draft (1978), p. 15. One comment received by the Commission states that the 1840 Constitution affirms that the native Hawaiians had aboriginal title to the Government and Crown lands.

29/ Chinen, The Great Mahele, pp. 25-29. Betts concedes that the lands at issue did not encompass 2,500,000 acres by 1898 (Betts, p. 15). Indeed, Congress believed that the "public lands" in Hawaii totaled only 1,740,000 acres. (H.R. Rep. No. 1355, 2nd Sess., p. 43 (1898)). MacKenzie states that the lands at issue total 1.75 million acres.

-p353-