Talk:Robert William Wilcox

Latest comment: 9 years ago by Mark Miller in topic Umi-a-Liloa of Maui line

Untitled

edit

The following is a duplicate article to be merged with this original....

Robert William Kalanihiapo Wilcox was a native Hawaiian leader and delegate to the U. S. Congress from Hawai`i. He was born in Kahalu`u, Honua`ula, on the island of Maui, Hawai`i, on February 15, 1855, the son of an American father from New England and a mother descended from the royalty of Maui. He was sent abroad by King David Kalakaua for an education at the Military Academy of Torino in Italy. He later served as a delegate to U.S. Congress from the Territory of Hawai`i from 1900 to until his death in 1903.

Bayonet Constitution Rebellion

edit

In 1887, a group of missionary descendants, sugar planters, imposed the Bayonet Constitution on King Kalakaua. This constitution abrogated native Hawaiian rights. In 1888, Wilcox led some 300 armed men in an attempt to unseat the government under the "Bayonet Constitution." Unsuccessful, Wilcox made another attempt, on July 30, 1889, this time leading an army of 150 Hawaiians, Europeans, and Chinese. Wearing his Italian officer's uniform—and with his men attired in red Garibaldi shirts made famous by the great Italian revolutionist — Wilcox and his men briefly occupied government buildings across the street from ‘Iolani Palace. Stronger government forces drove them out. Seven insurgents were killed and a dozen more wounded. The government brought Wilcox to trial for high treason. Hawaiians, however, accused those in power of being usurpers and having blood-stained hands. A jury of his peers refused to convict Wilcox.

Attempt at Restoration

edit

After the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy in 1893 and the subsequent reign of the Provisional Government, the Republic of Hawai`i was established in 1894 with Sanford B. Dole as its president. In 1895 native Hawaiians, led again by Robert Wilcox, revolted in an attempt to return the queen to power. After 10 days of fighting, Wilcox and most of the other royalists were captured. They were sentenced to death, but saved by intervention of the U.S. government. Wilcox was subsequently court-martialed and sentenced to death; the sentence was later commuted to 35 years; pardoned by the President of the Republic of Hawaii, Sanford B. Dole in 1898. Firearms were discovered buried in the queen's flower garden, and she was arrested. For eight months she was held prisoner in one room of the Iolani Palace. She was charged with misprision of treason (knowing about treason and not reporting it). Her trial by military tribunal was held in the former throne room of her palace. The queen was found guilty and sentenced to a $5,000 fine and five years of hard labor. The sentence was not carried out, however. On New Year's Day, 1896, Wilcox and the other royalists were released. Queen Liliuokalani was not freed until later that year.

Contradictory caption

edit

The photo caption says he was found innocent each time, whereas the article states in the last instance he was sentenced to death. Rogermexico 16:45, 21 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

The caption is a bit misleading. —Viriditas | Talk 01:53, 22 May 2006 (UTC)Reply
Indeed, doubly so. History is a bit more nuanced. Hs first revolution was also against the Monarch in power at the time. How about it now? Article still needs a biobox, and more citations. Better picture if possible. W Nowicki (talk) 19:12, 26 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Looks like biobox was added (anonymously), but a few nits: I do not think he was a "Duke", it was just a nickname. Also just a "Delegate" to Congress, not a "Member", as indicated in the navbox at the bottom. Not sure how to indicate that in the infobox however. Still needs citations. W Nowicki (talk) 16:19, 2 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Umi-a-Liloa of Maui line

edit

I believe it is notable enough to go past Umi to Kalanikaumakaowakea in text. Probably a more notable mention as umi never ruled but his father seems to have been Moi of Maui according to Fornander. Do I have that correct? [1].--Mark Miller (talk) 19:30, 2 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

If so the same applies for Lonomakaihonua who was a non-ruling son of Lonohonuakini.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 20:30, 2 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
I agree. Lets leave the current text as is and add another sentence to expand on the lineage using Fornander or another such source.--Mark Miller (talk) 22:02, 2 September 2015 (UTC)Reply