Letter also sought to rewrite history
Thurston Twigg-Smith writes in his Jan. 23 letter: "There are apparently no bounds to rewriting history."
Twigg-Smith should know; he states: " ... she (Lili'uokalani) went to the Supreme Court, for example, to gain personal title to the ceded lands ... " Mr. Twigg-Smith is wrong. Lili'uokalani sued in the United States Court of Claims, not the Supreme Court. Lili'uokalani sued not for "personal title to the ceded lands," as Twigg-Smith states, but rather her complaint addressed her interest in the crown portion of the crown and government lands as follows:
"First: That the United States of America be summoned to appear and answer this complaint and be bound by the proceedings herein.
"Second: That the United States be decreed to be a Trustee of the Crown Lands herein before specified for the use and benefit of your petitioner (Lili'uokalani) so far as her equitable life interest in said Crown Lands is concerned.
"Third: That the United States be decreed to pay to your petitioner (Lili'uokalani) said sum of Four Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars ($450,000), or in the alternative that the United States be decreed to account to your petitioner for the rents, profits and emoluments derived from said Crown Lands after deducting the necessary and proper expenses of managing the same, for the period of six years next preceding the date of filing this petition. ... "
Twigg-Smith's letter typifies the snide anti-Hawaiian revisionism he seems to take great pleasure in. Hawaiians know who their queen was and what she stood for. Mr. Twigg-Smith, why are you trying to change that by offering these revisions of well-documented and easily researched history?
Seen at http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/current/op/letters