Mahele Documents

Claim Number: 00937
Claimant: Hawaiinaaupo
Other claimant:
Other name:
Island: Oahu
District: Kona
Ahupuaa: Honolulu
Ili: Kamakela, Aala
Statistics: 3008 characters 513 words
No. 937, Hawaiinaaupo, Honolulu, September 24, 1847
N.R. 547-548v2

Greetings to the Land Commissioners: I hereby tell you of our house lot claim in Honolulu at a place called Nulihopu. It is bounded on the north by the lot of Keaweluahi, on the east by the lot of Naheana, on the south and west by the lot of Keaweluahi. Nanauli was the one who had our claim -- he went to a different place and left this place to me. It is I who am telling of our claim. Nanauli and his makuas occupied it from the time of Kamehameha I, and then left lt. I have held it peacefully with no objections. I also tell of my claim for our single small patch at Aala on Oahu, next to Bakamia's patches. It has been held peacefully under the konohiki.

F.T. 269v2
Claim 937, Hawaiinaaupo, 7 April [1848]

Kananuauli, sworn, I know this place. It is a house lot in Makila, Honolulu aina, consisting of kalo patches also, bounded:

Mau ....

[End of Top Preview]

This document has been trimmed for your preview.

To view and download this record, add to your document tray by clicking on the button.

Add to Document Tray

[End of Preview]

.... i's land, Waikiki toward the ocean and also on the Ewa side.

This place has been enclosed with one house in it. Hawaiinaaupo's claim is from me, although I have given it to him to take care of it in my name. Hawaiinaaupo has said, "This place is not mine. It is for Kauanauli and I shall live under him; therefore, it is property that this property be possessed in his name." This property had been from Kamehameha I and my interest is from my parents. No one has ever objected.

Naheana, sworn and stated, "I have seen this. The boundaries are the same as have been just related to you. This property is for Kauanauli with Hawaiinaaupo living peacefully under him. Be had received this interest from Pali, his father, during the time perhaps of Kamehameha I. He also had di-rected Hawaiinaaupo to include this property in the claim; however, the fallacy of this interest rests with the person who wrote (the claim)."

[No. 937 not awarded]