II A W A 1 I A N GROUP. 31 



of a comparison between the past and present condition of the Hawaii- 

 ans, and between their usages and customs and those of the other 

 groups of Polynesia. On these points I have endeavoured to obtain 

 the most correct information, and have been fortunate in receiving it 

 from the highest and most authentic sources. 



In former times there were no fixed laws of succession to the throne, 

 and the practice in relation to it varied. It was, however, the general 

 usage that the crown should descend, on the death of a sovereign, to 

 one of his children, sons being preferred to daughters, and the rank of 

 the mother being taken into consideration, as well as priority of birth. 

 Thus Kamehameha I. had children by several wives, but his eldest 

 son, as well as a daughter, were superseded by the children of another 

 w 7 ife of more elevated birth. Even if a sovereign had sons by females 

 of low origin, a daughter might succeed, if her mother were of very 

 elevated rank. 



A case of this sort had occurred two generations prior to the disco- 

 very of the island, when the throne was held by Queen Keokeolaui, 

 who had several half-brothers, but they were of lower rank on the 

 mother's side. There have been only two instances of the accession 

 of females to the supreme power, Keokeolaui, and Laca, of still greater 

 antiquity. 



Exceptions sometimes were made to the regular descent, by the con- 

 ceded right of the sovereign to name his successor ; and, in conse- 

 quence, it has sometimes been willed to a younger instead of the elder 

 son, of the same mother, and sometimes to a member of another fa- 

 mily. Where special reasons existed for such a course, it was gene- 

 rally concurred in by the chiefs. But these rules were often set aside, 

 and personal valour decided the point. Kamehameha I. was an in- 

 stance of this kind. 



A chief of inferior rank stood little chance of attaining the royal 

 dignity, however highly he might be endowed ; but even the lawful 

 heir, if a weak and pusillanimous man, was sure to be supplanted by a 

 chief better qualified. Thus, in consequence of their being many dif- 

 ferent aspirants for the high office, the death of a king was always the 

 signal for a civil war. 



During the life of a king he generally signified his wish in relation 

 to the descent of the crown, and often a council of chiefs was called 

 upon the subject. If they all concurred, it put a stop to any diffi- 

 culties, and the party nominated succeeded to the kingdom without 

 disturbance. 



If the king married a low woman, the right of her children to the 

 crown was always disputed. Hence it was considered of great im- 



