Nhsc-v1-365

From GrassrootWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Previous Page Next Page

nhsc-v1-365

Text Only

lands (Sioux Tribe, et al. v. United States, 205 Ct.Cl. 148, 171 (1974)).

131/ The legislative history is full of references to the native Hawaiian—"native population" (Sen. Doc. No. 214, 55th Cong., 2nd Sess. p. 8 (1898)); "native Hawaiians" (H.R. Rep. No. 1355, 55th Cong., 2nd Sess., pp. 43, 49, 56 (1898)); "native race," "aborigines," "natives" (31 Cong. Rec, pp. 5982, 6010, 6142, 6144, 6260, 6526, 6663, 6702 (1898)). [Emphasis supplied.)

132/ See H.R. Rep. No. 1355, 55th Cong., 2nd Sess. p. 49 (1898) (two paragraph discussion and definition of "native Hawaiians"); 31 Cong. Rec, p. 6189 (reference to "the Hawaiians proper," i.e., "full-blooded" and "part" Hawaiians, as one of three "important races"); and 31 Cong. Rec, p. 6573 (distinction drawn between "inhabitants of the Hawaiian Islands" and the "native Hawaiians").

133/ 31 Cong. Rec, pp. 6189, 6260-6261, 6526 (1898).

134/ Act of April 30, 1900, 31 Stat. 141 (1900).

135/ Section 73, 31 Stat. 141, 154.

136/ Act of May 17, 1884, 23 Stat. 24, 26.

137/ Tee-Hit-Ton Indians v. United States, 348 U.S. 272, 278 (1955).

138/ Ibid.

139/ Nor does Section 91 of the Organic Act of 1900 evidence any intention by Congress to grant native Hawaiians the right to use and occupy Crown and Government lands permanently.

140/ OHA's Comments, pp. 26-27. Similarly, Senator Inouye refers to the "historical treatment of land titles conferred by foreign governments to lands subsequently annexed by or ceded to the United States" (Senator Inouye's Comments, p. 39).

141/ E.g., Interstate Land Company v. Maxwell Land Grant Company, 139 U.S. 569, 588 (1891).

142/ See 45 Am Jur 2nd, International Law, $33 (1969). See also McMicken v. United States, 97 U.S. 204, 209 (1877): Hornaby v. United States, 77 U.S. (10 Wall.) 224, 234 (1869); and Fremont v. United States, 58 U.S. (17 How.) 542, 560 (1854).

143/ United States v. Fullard-Leo, et. al., 331 U.S. 256, 266 (1947); and Hornaby v. United States, 77 U.S. (10 Wall.) 224, 242 (1969).

144/ Thurston v. Bishop, 7 Haw. 421, 438 (1888); Kahoomana v. Moehonua, 3 Haw. 635, 639 (1875); and Kenoa v. Meek, 6 Haw. 63, 67 (1872).

145/ Liliuokalani v. United States, 45 Ct.Cl. 418, 426-428 (1910).

146/ Thurston v. Bishop, 7 Haw. 421, 438 (1888).

147/ State v. Zimring, 58 Haw. 106, 113 (1977). See also Senator Inouye's Comments (p. 41, note 20) which concur with this statement.

148/ Barker v. Harvey, 181 U.S. 481, 498-499 (1901) (property rights under Mexican law); Indians of California v. United States, 98 Ct. CI. 583, 591-592 (1942), cert. denied, 319 U.S. 764 (1943) (property rights under Mexican law); and Hayt v. United States, 38 Ct. CI. 455, 461-464 (1903) (property rights under Mexican law). Cf. Carino v. Insular Government of the Philippine Islands, 212 U.S. 449 (1909) (land claimed as property of

-p365-

Previous Page Next Page