In the 1882 case of Aarona Hatton vs. Piopio, it was argued that tenants of the land have right to the fishery and to catch fish for their own use, as well as to sell. It was brought before the Intermediary Court of Oahu on May 26, Chief Justice Judd presiding.
The case comes up on appeal from the District Court of Ewa on the following agreed statement of facts:
Below is a Hawaiian-language report on the Haalelea vs. Montgomery proceedings entitled “Olelo Hooholo a ka Ahakiekie. O Levi Haalelea kue Daniel Montgomery” that was published in the newspaper Ka Hae Hawaii.
Hoakaka ae la ka Lunakanawai o Robertson i ka manao hooholo o ka Aha, penei:
Ke hoopii mai nei o Haalelea, i mea e maopopo ai ke kuleana o ka honu ia ana i hoopaapaaia e ka mea kue e D. Montgomery, a e loaa paha ia ia kona poino no kona hoole ia aole make hopu ia ma kauwahi o Montgomery, ma Puuloa i Oahu nei.
Levi Ha‘alelea brought suit against Daniel Montgomery in 1858 in the matter of fishery rights at Honouliuli. The following argues that Montgomery does not own exclusive rights to the fishing grounds off Puuloa, and thus tenants of Honouliuli are entitled to fish in those waters.
Mose, a native of Honouliuli, presented a public account of the distress that he, Isaaka, and Makahanohano endured in being denied access to the shore along Ke Awalau o Pu‘uloa by a foreign tenant of the land, and asked the king if this action was authorized by him. The English translation following it is not complete, but is a summary.
Poino!
Native Hawaiian historian Samuel M. Kamakau observed
The making of pa‘akai—sea salt—was one of the significant traditional practices associated with the coastal lands of Honouliuli. There are a number of Māhele claims by native tenants of the larger Pu‘uloa land division for salt-making sites. While no specific claim was identified for the wetland or shoreline zone within the Hoakalei program area, it is reasonable to assume that the making of pa‘akai was done in the area.
The following account was entitled “Village Planned for Puuloa Peninsula.” In the fashion of the day, it carried several subtitles, including “Immense and promising scheme of the Dowsett estate,” “Arrangements for quiet retreat,” “To occupy a mile of land almost facing Pearl Harbor,” “Material for short railway arrives,” and “By Claudine—Handsome Boulevard—Branch railroad—boating, Fishing and other attractions.” Among the things planned for the village are a railway, a tree-shaded boulevard, and boating and bathing facilities.
The article below, published in 1901, is entitled “Dedication of Puuloa Church.” Following the fashion of the day, the article carried several subtitles, including “Does not owe a cent,” “Puuloa Church is dedicated to God,” “Contributions were generous,” and “A deficit of $170 raised before the consecration—Liliuokalani present.” The money raised for the construction of the church was short because it turned out to cost more than expected. Some dignitaries were present at the dedication, whose generous donations were able to cover the extra cost.
In the narratives below, Kalakini, a resident of Kalihi, shares with readers of the newspaper Ka Lahui Hawaii a description of his trip to the uplands of Līhu‘e in Honouliuli Ahupua‘a.
