TlIK HAWAIIAN PKoi'Llv 55 



Since the eliiei's were Ix'licved l),v llie coiiinu)n people to he desceiideil i'l-din 

 the gods in some mysterious and complicated way, they wer-e supposed to be in 

 close touch with tlie invisible i)owers. They were looked up to with super- 

 stitious awe, as being both powerful and sacred. This' ndvantage was shrewdly 

 employed l)y the ruling class in securing the respect and iiii<iiiestioned sul)- 

 mission of the common people. Death was the penalty inflicted for the slightest 

 breach of etiquette. Through the enforcement of such submission the chiefs 

 were able to exact the marks of distinction claimed by them from the masses, 

 and to control and direct them through a blind rule of duty. Singularly enough 

 the chiefs were respected while living and in most cases were revered })y the 

 people after their death. 



Among the chiefs themselves there was constant bickering and class rivalry. 

 The moi, or king of each island usually inherited his i)Osition, but the accident 

 of birth did not guarantee that he would long remain in power, for unfortu- 

 nately the assurance of his i)lace lay in the hands of the district chiefs under 

 him. Seldom could they' be relied upon for unshaken fealty. Their love of 

 power and capacity for intrigue, as a rule, was not of a common order and 

 they were often able to demonstrate their complete mastery of the game of 

 politics. 



The important chiefs were therefore usually summoned by the king to sit in 

 council as an advisory body when weighty matters were to be passed upon. 

 But the immediate source of all constructive law as such, among the ancient 

 Iljiwaiians, was the will of their king. Not unlike kings in more enlightened 

 lands, they were guided in important matters by their stronger chiefs whose 

 influence they required. These, in turn, were influenced by and dependent upon 

 the good will of the people under them, for there was nothing to prevent the 

 common people from transferring their personal affections and allegiance to 

 other and more considerate chiefs. But back of the king, the chiefs, and the 

 people M'as the traditional code of customary laAV that served as a powerful re- 

 straint on the king in preventing the promulgation of purely arbitrarj^ decrees. 

 The traditional law of the land related mostly to religious and customary ob- 

 servances, marriage, the family relation, lands, irrigation, personal property and 

 barter. With such crimes as theft, personal revenge was the court of first 

 resort. The aggrieved person had the right, if he so desired, to seek the aid of 

 a kindred chief, or to resort to sorcery with the aid of his kahiuia. The king, 

 however, was the chief magistrate, with his various chiefs exercising inferior 

 jurisdiction in their own territories. 



The King and the Land. 



The king was regarded as the sole proprietor of the land : of the pcojile who 

 cultivated it, the fish of the sea, — in fact everything oti 1he land oi' in the sea 

 about it was the property of the king. The king, in short, owned everything, 

 the people owned nothing, so that technically, the peo|)le existed in a state of 

 abject dependence. The system that developed lidiii Ihis was one of complete 



