1 Claxton to Bunker, December 6, 1919. RG 12. Records of the Office of Education. Records of the Office of the Commissioner. Historical Files, 1870–1950. File 501: Local School Surveys. Box #56 Folder: “Hawaii.” National Archives [hereafter HSF]. Bunker was the director of the federal survey in Hawaii.Google Scholar

2 Okihiro, Gary Y. Cane Fires: The Anti-Japanese Movement in Hawaii, 1865–1945 (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991); Ronald Takaki, Pau Hana: Plantation Life and Labor in Hawaii 1835–1920 (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1983); Dennis M. Ogawa, Jan Ken Po: The World of Hawaii's Japanese Americans (Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii, 1973); Masayo U. Duus, The Japanese Conspiracy: The Oahu Sugar Strike of 1920 (Berkeley: University of California, 1999); James H. Okahata, ed., A History of Japanese Immigrants in Hawaii (Honolulu: United Japanese Society of Hawaii, 1964).Google Scholar

3 Halsted, Ann L. “Sharpened Tongues: The Controversy Over the ‘Americanization’ of Japanese Language Schools in Hawaii, 1919–1927“ (Ph.D. diss., Stanford University, 1989); Yoshihide Matsubayashi, “The Japanese Language Schools in Hawaii and California from 1892 to 1941” (Ph.D. diss., University of San Francisco, 1984); Koichi G. Harada, “Survey of the Japanese Language Schools in Hawaii” (Master's thesis, University of Hawaii, 1934); Yukuji Okita, Hawai Nikkei Imin no Kyoikushi [Educational History of Japanese Immigrants in Hawaii] (Tokyo: Minerva, 1997); The Japanese Education Association, Hawai Nihongo Kyoikushi [A History of the Japanese Language Education in Hawaii] (Honolulu: The Japanese Education Association, 1937); Gijo Ozawa, Hawai Nihongo Gakko Kyoikushi [Educational History of Japanese Language Schools in Hawaii (Honolulu: Hawaii Kyoiku Kai, 1972); John N. Hawkins, “Politics, Education, and Language Policy: The Case of Japanese Language Schools in Hawaii,” Amerasia, 5 (1978): 39–56; Gail Y. Miyasaki, “The Schooling of the Nisei in Hawaii” Educational Perspectives 20 (Winter 1981): 20–25; Alan R. Shoho, “Americanization Through Public Education of Japanese in Hawaii: 1930–1941” (Ph.D. diss., Arizona State University, 1990); Agnes M. Niyekawa-Howard, “History of the Japanese Language School” Educational Perspectives 13 (March 1974): 6–14.Google Scholar

4 Territory of Hawaii Session Laws, 1917, 509–10; quoted in Halsted, “Sharpened Tongues,” 81–82.Google Scholar

5 On survey research in education, see: Diane Ravitch, Left Back: A Century of Failed School Reforms (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000), 102–107; Ellen Condliffe Lagemann, An Elusive Science: The Troubling History of Education Research (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 80–87; Hollis Leland Caswell, City School Surveys: An Interpretation and Appraisal (New York: Teachers College, Columbia University Press, 1929), 26–27.Google Scholar

6 Ravitch, Left Back, 54. The meaning of progressive education has long been debated among education historians. Ravitch reviews some of the most significant interpretations. See also Robert L. Church, Michael B. Katz, Harold Silver and Lawrence A. Cremin in the forum, “The Metropolitan Experience in American Education,” History of Education Quarterly 29 (Fall 1989): 419–446. Also see William J. Reese, Power and the Promise of School Reform: Grassroots Movements during the Progressive Era (Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986).Google Scholar

7 Lagemann, An Elusive Science, 82.Google Scholar

8 The classic study on the Americanization movement is John Higham, Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1955); however, Eileen H. Tamura, Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity: The Nisei Generation in Hawaii (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1994), 55–57 passim presents an insightful treatment relevant to Hawaii.Google Scholar

9 Thompson, Frank V. Schooling of the Immigrant (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1920), 288–89. For more recent studies, see William G. Ross, Forging New Freedoms: Nativism, Education, and the Constitution, 1917–1927 (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1994); Frederick C. Luebke, “Legal Restrictions on Foreign Languages in the Great Plains States, 1917–1923,” in Language in Conflict: Linguistic Acculturation on the Great Plains, ed. Paul Schach, (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1980), 1–19.Google Scholar

10 Takaki, Ronald Strangers from a Different Shore: A History of Asian Americans (New York: Penguin, 1989); Okihiro, Cane Fires. Google Scholar

11 Fuchs, Lawrence H. Hawaii Pono: A Social History (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1961), 43.Google Scholar

12 Ibid., 21.Google Scholar

13 See Chapter 5 of Van Sant, John E., Pacific Pioneers: Japanese Journeys to America and Hawaii, 1850–80 (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2000).Google Scholar

14 Daniels, Roger Asian America: Chinese and Japanese in the United States since 1850 (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1988), 127. Tamura, Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity, 58.Google Scholar

15 Japanese traditionally met their marriage partner through relatives and acquaintances, by typically exchanging pictures at first. Often times, the hard life and the cost of transportation to Japan discouraged Issei men to go home and find a wife; instead, they asked fellow villagers to find a suitable spouse for him.Google Scholar

16 Tamura, Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity, 30.Google Scholar

17 Although the population of Japanese descent in Hawaii had declined since 1920 from 42 to 37 percent, it was commonly predicted that they would eventually become the majority. Roger Bell, Last Among Equals: Hawaiian Statehood and American Politics (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1984), 72.Google Scholar

18 U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Percentage Plans for Restriction of Immigration Hearings, 66th Congress, 1st session, 1919 (Washington D.C.: GPO, 1919), 32–33. For more on McClatchy see Roger Daniels, The Politics of Prejudice: The Anti-Japanese Movement in California and the Struggle of Japanese Exclusion (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1962).Google Scholar

19 The first Japanese language school was established in Kohala, Hawaii Island in 1893. Hideo Kuwahara, the teacher of the school taught around 30 Japanese students. Ozawa, Hawai Nihongo Gakko Kyoikushi, 20.Google Scholar

20 Tamura, Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity, 146.Google Scholar

21 Halsted, “Sharpened Tongues,“ 69.Google Scholar

22 Okihiro, Cane Fires, 130–31.Google Scholar

23 Hunter, Louise H. Buddhism in Hawaii: Its Impact on a Yankee Community (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1971), 95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

24 Ibid., 95.Google Scholar

25 Ibid., 93.Google Scholar

26 Ibid., 96.Google Scholar

27 Daniels, Politics, for the anti-Japanese movement in California. See Akira Iriye, Pacific Estrangement: Japanese and American Expansion, 1897–1911 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1972) on the actual colonial visions of the Pacific held by Japan and the United States.Google Scholar

28 The 20,651 also includes a small number of Japanese students who attended private schools in Hawai'i. Harada, “A Survey of the Japanese Language Schools in Hawai'i.” 102. The entire enrollment of in the public schools was 41,350 students in 1920, and according to Tamura, Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity, 30, 47 percent of which were the Nisei students.Google Scholar

29 Ozawa, Hawai Nihongo Gakko Kyoikushi, 49.Google Scholar

30 Ibid., 84. The Imperial Rescript on Education is the code of morality, created around the idea that loyalty and obedience to the Emperor, the head of the state, is equivalent to loyalty and obedience to the state. Yuji Ichioka, The Issei (New York: The Free Press, 1988), 201.Google Scholar

31 Tamura, Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity, 96. Also see John E. Reinecke, Language and Dialect in Hawaii: A Sociolinguistic History to 1935, ed. Stanley M. Tsuzaki, (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1969).Google Scholar

32 Tamura, Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity, 96.Google Scholar

33 Wist, Benjamin O. A Century of Public Education in Hawaii (Honolulu: Hawaii Educational Review, 1940), 161; Riley Allen, “Education and Race Problems in Hawaii,” American Review of Reviews (Dec. 1921): 616; quoted in Tamura, Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity, 108.Google Scholar

34 Tamura, Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity, 107–08.Google Scholar

35 Fuchs, Hawaii Pono, 274.Google Scholar

36 Tamura, Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity, 110. In response to these parents’ complaints, the DPI experimentally introduced an English examination to enter Central Grammar School in Honolulu at the end of World War I, and the parents appealed to have more of such “English Standard schools” in 1920. See Tamura, Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity, 108–15 for more details of on what essentially was segregation of students by ethnicity.Google Scholar

37 Judd was a lawyer and had served as a representative of the Hawaiian Sugar Planters’ Association in their 1906 effort to secure Filipino laborers. John William Siddall, Men of Hawaii (Honolulu: Star Bulletin, 1917), 553.Google Scholar

38 Judd defined “teachers” as including administrators, and “schools” as “all schools in the Territory,” except “Sabbath” schools. Halsted, “Sharpened Tongues,” 94.Google Scholar

39 Ibid., 93–95.Google Scholar

40 Ozawa, Hawai Nihongo Gakko Kyoikushi, 97–106.Google Scholar

41 Reinecke, John E. Feigned Necessity: Hawaii's Attempt to Obtain Chinese Contract Labor, 1921–1923 (San Francisco: Chinese Material Center, 1979), 52. Secretary of State, Robert Lansing sent a cablegram to the California legislature, requesting “no anti-Japanese action” in 1919. Daniels, Politics, 82.Google Scholar

42 The College of Hawaii later became the University of Hawaii.Google Scholar

43 Penhallow to Lane, June 10, 1914, HSF.Google Scholar

44 Penhallow, Claxton to June 30, 1914, HSF.Google Scholar

45 Claxton, Weaver to August 28, 1916, HSF.Google Scholar

46 Club, College “Letter to the Governor of the Territory of Hawaii, Superintendent of Public Instruction, and Commission of Public Instruction,“ copy sent to Claxton, November 15, 1916, HSF.Google Scholar

47 Ibid.Google Scholar

48 Reinecke, Language, 80–81. According to Reinecke, the percentile of teachers of Portuguese and Spanish ethnicity combined was 8.5%, while that of Chinese, Japanese, and Korean are 4.7 percent, 2.0 percent and 0.2 percent, respectively. The numbers of students with Portuguese, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese and Korean ethnic backgrounds were tabulated from Department of Public Instruction, Biennial Report 1923–4, 113.Google Scholar

49 Club, College “Letter to the Governor of the Territory of Hawaii, Superintendent of Public Instruction, and Commission of Public Instruction,“ copy sent to Claxton, November 15, 1916, HSF.Google Scholar

50 Claxton, Weaver to December 18, 1916, HSF.Google Scholar

51 The Superintendent of the Normal Schools was Edgar Wood from 1897 to 1921. Tamura, Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity, 198.Google Scholar

52 Claxton, Weaver to December 18, 1916, HSF. After sending off the letter, Weaver immediately sent a cablegram as well as another letter to Claxton to express her regret for being so personal, and asked Claxton to destroy her first letter. Weaver to Claxton, December 21, 1916. However, a public high school teacher (who happened to confer with one of the federal survey committee members, and was asked about the schools in Hawaii) also informed of similar problems in her letter to Claxton, writing, “so many of their principals and teachers are old, inefficient,” who smoke cigarettes and live immoral lives.” She also pointed out corruption among school administrators, such as positions given to friends. R. H. Wallin to Claxton, January 2, 1917, HSF.Google Scholar

53 Claxton, Pinkham to December 15, 1916, HSF.Google Scholar

54 Pinkham, Although used the Governor's official letterhead, Pinkham underlined the “Personal” to emphasize it was not official invitation. Pinkham to Claxton, March 8, 1917, HSF.Google Scholar

55 Claxton, Pinkham to March 8, 1917, HSF.Google Scholar

56 Pinkham had his stenographer transcribe their interview of December 5, 1916, and sent a copy to Claxton with his letter of March 8, 1917, HSF.Google Scholar

57 The College Club to Claxton, May 8, 1917, HSF.Google Scholar

58 Claxton, Kinney to January 22, 1918, HSF. Claxton originally planed to send H. W. Fought, Bureau of Education Specialist in Rural School Practice, and Willis E. Johnson, President of Northern Normal and Industrial School, South Dakota to undertake the survey in the fall of 1918.Google Scholar

59 Reinecke, Feigned, 621.Google Scholar

60 Claxton, McCarthy to November 8, 1918, HSF. The 1919 regular session of Senate passed an Act to authorize the Governor and Superintendent of the Department of Public Instruction to invite the Bureau of Education to investigate the educational situation in Hawaii. Matsubayashi, “Japanese Language Schools,” 111.Google Scholar

61 McCarthy, Claxton to November 23,1918, HSF.Google Scholar

62 Tamura, Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity, 3; Miyasaki, “Schooling of the Nisei in Hawaii,” 21.Google Scholar

63 Bell, Last Among Equals, 42. Fuchs, Hawaii Pono, 22.Google Scholar

64 Ibid., 263.Google Scholar

65 Ibid., 268–69, 272.Google Scholar

66 Daniels, Politics, 81–83. California's exclusionists were around this time preoccupied with establishing a revised alien land law, and a Japanese language school was not on the agenda until the initiative vote for the 1920 alien land law passed on November 1920.Google Scholar

67 Claxton, MacCaughey to April 8, 1919, HSF. MacCaughey was appointed Superintendent of Public Instruction for the Territory of Hawaii by Governor McCarthy, and took office on April 1, 1919.Google Scholar

68 Claxton, MacCaughey to July 25, 1919, HSF.Google Scholar

69 MacCaughey, Vaughan “Some Outstanding Educational Problems of Hawaii,“ School and Society 9 (January 1919): 99–105. The illiteracy rate was based on the 1910 census.Google Scholar

70 Ibid, 100.Google Scholar

71 Ibid., 100–01.Google Scholar

72 A resolution, under the names of MacCaughey and missionaries Takie Okumura, Orramel H. Gulick and Teiichi Hori manifested his participation in a campaign to wipe out Buddhist influence from the Japanese community by cutting off its financial resources: “The Japanese Section of the Hawaiian Evangelical Association believes that Hawaiian sugar planters’ continuous financial support to non-Christian organizations would hurt Hawaii's welfare as well as hamper the Christianization and Americanization of the foreigners in Hawaii.” (Hawaii Hochi, July 12, 1920. Translation by the author).Google Scholar

73 Shortly after Kinney resigned, he shared his opinion of Japanese language schools in the Pacific Commercial Advertiser based on his investigation of these schools and examination of their textbooks during his term. Kinney reported that he found no evidence suggesting Buddhist language schools instill Emperor worship or contradict Americanization. It is a groundless claim, continued Kinney, who found them working to promote Americanism. He implied that this accusation against Japanese language schools stemmed from a minority religious denomination's efforts to damage the Japanese language schools run by the competing religious group. The Jiji Shimpo (Tokyo) April 15, 1919. Cited in The Japanese Education Association, Hawai'i Nihongo Gakko Kyoikushi, 262. Hawkins, however, describes Kinney as being against Japanese schools. Hawkins, “Politics, Education, and Language Policy,” 47.Google Scholar

74 Hunter, Buddhism in Hawaii, 108. MacCaughey took office in March 1919.Google Scholar

75 Pacific Commercial Advertiser, October 11, 1919.Google Scholar

76 Claxton, Bunker to November 20, 1919, HSF.Google Scholar

77 Claxton, MacCaughey to September 4, 1919, HSF.Google Scholar

78 Claxton, Bunker to October 13, 1919, HSF.Google Scholar

79 Ibid.Google Scholar

80 Ibid.Google Scholar

81 Claxton, Bunker to October 14, 1919, HSF.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

82 Claxton, Bunker to October 28, 1919, HSF.Google Scholar

83 Ibid.Google Scholar

84 Claxton, Bunker to November 20, 1919, HSF.Google Scholar

85 Claxton, Bunker to October 30, 1919, HSF.Google Scholar

86 Bunker recommended Twiss. Bunker to Claxton, October 30, 1919, HSF.Google Scholar

87 Claxton, Bunker to November 20, 1919, HSF.Google Scholar

88 Pacific Commercial Advertiser, November 6, 1919.Google Scholar

89 Banking was one of the Oligarchy's key industries. Bell, Last Among Equals, 42. Fuchs, Hawaii Pono, 22.Google Scholar

90 Pacific Commercial Advertiser, November 6, 1919.Google Scholar

91 Maui News, November 7, 1919.Google Scholar

92 Palmer's, “congregation at the Central Union Church included many of Hawaii's leading capitalists.“ During the 1920 strike, Palmer also preached a sermon to present a plan for ending the strike. Reinecke, Feigned, 110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

93 Pacific Commercial Advertiser, November 10, 1919.Google Scholar

94 Hawaii Educational Review, February 1920, 22–3.Google Scholar

95 Okihiro, Cane Fires, 67.Google Scholar

96 Honolulu Star Bulletin, November 7, 1919.Google Scholar

97 Pacific Commercial Advertiser, November 7, 10, 1919.Google Scholar

98 The newspapers’ stands were summarized in the Pacific Commercial Advertiser, November 7, 1919.Google Scholar

99 Pacific Commercial Advertiser, November 6, 1919.Google Scholar

100 Ibid.Google Scholar

101 Bunker, Claxton to December 6, 1919, HSF.Google Scholar

102 Lewis, Charles L. Philander Priestley Claxton (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1948), 207; Luebke, “Legal Restrictions on Foreign Languages in the Great Plains States, 1917–1923,” 6.Google Scholar

103 Lewis, Philander Priestly Claxton, 191.Google Scholar

104 Claxton, Bunker to December 23, 1919, HSF.Google Scholar

105 Claxton, Bunker to December 23, 1919, HSF.Google Scholar

106 McCarthy's, speech was reprinted in the Pacific Commercial Advertiser, December 29, 1919.Google Scholar

107 Claxton, Bunker to December 23, 1919, HSF.Google Scholar

108 The “Big Five” agents for the sugar plantations were C. Brewer & Co. Ltd., and Castle & Cook Ltd., American Factors Ltd., Alexander & Baldwin, Ltd., and Theo. H. Davies & Company Ltd.Google Scholar

109 Fuchs, Hawaii Pono, 186–87.Google Scholar

110 Honolulu Advertiser, August 6, 1918. Cited in Hunter, Buddhism in Hawaii, 107.Google Scholar

111 Fuchs, Hawaii Pono, 187.Google Scholar

112 Phelan proposed disallowing the children of “aliens ineligible to citizenship,” that is the children of Asian immigrants and residents, including the Nisei to become citizens. Daniels, Politics, 88, 104; Okihiro, Cane Fires, 159.Google Scholar

113 Claxton, Bunker to December 23, 1919, HSF.Google Scholar

114 MacCaughey, Bunker to May 28, 1920, Telegram, HSF.Google Scholar

115 Halsted, “Sharpened Tongues,“ 82.Google Scholar

116 This confidential ONI report was circulated among several government offices, such as the Army's Military Intelligence Division, the Department of State, and the Bureau of Education. ONI, August 20, 1919, HSF.Google Scholar

117 Okihiro, Cane Fires, 102–3. This was despite the fact that Japan was an American ally in World War I.Google Scholar

118 Ibid., 131, 295.Google Scholar

119 ONI, August 20, 1919, HSF.Google Scholar

120 ONI report, August 20, 1919, HSF. In Taiheiyo no Rakuen, [Paradise in the Pacific] (n.d., n.p.), Okumura was very critical and resentful of the anti-school control bill movement conducted by the Japanese, writing in August 1919 (but not published until later) that: “The movement of the anti-school control law, conducting throughout the islands and working at the legislature, ended with success. It was a big celebration, giving letters of thanks to the leaders of the association and parties for the teachers to thank for their efforts. However, it is wondered if this movement actually made a hindrance for the Japanese future and our relationship with America…. If the Americanization of the Japanese in Hawaii is the key to our success for the future, the movement against the school control bill is considered to have destroyed the foundation of our success.” (Okumura, 276–7: Translation by the author). Okumura's solution to the school control bill would be to place these schools under government supervision and disconnect the ties with religious organizations. Actually, when the Judd bill was introduced, there was a rumor that Okumura was the source of the bill in order to retaliate to the Hongwanji schools. However, Hunter who studied Okumura's personal papers did not see Okumura's direct involvement with the bill. She wrote, however, “his peripheral activities and his later ‘projects’ for Americanizing the local-born Japanese were motivated by the desire to liquidate Buddhism and all Buddhist institutions.” Hunter, Buddhism in Hawaii, 113.Google Scholar

121 Office of Naval Intelligence (Washington, D.C.) to State Department, Operations, and Military Intelligence Division, August 14, 1918, RG 165 MID, File No. 1052-37/1. National Archives; See also Okihiro, Cane Fires, 102–05.Google Scholar

122 Although appointed by the President, the Hawaii's Governor reported to the Secretary of the Interior. Fuchs, Hawaii Pono, 184.Google Scholar

123 McCarthy, C. J. to Secretary of Interior, January 31, 1921, File of the Governors, McCarthy, General Files, U.S. Department, Interior Department, Re. Japanese Language Schools. This bill was probably the so-called Lyman's bill. Cited in Okihiro, Cane Fires, 108.Google Scholar

124 Bunker also wrote chapters one and two. The fourth and fifth chapters were written by Kemp, while the sixth and eighth were produced by Twiss, and Koble was in charge of chapter seven. (Bunker to Claxton, November 20, 1919, HSF). This paper analyzes the Japanese language issue, and does not examine the survey's other findings. For analyses of these, see Tamura, Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity, 199, Fuchs, Hawaii Pono, 270–73, Wist, A Century of Public Education in Hawaii. Google Scholar

125 Department, U. S. of the Interior. Bureau of Education, A Survey of Education in Hawaii. Bulletin 1920, No. 16. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, [1920]), 109.Google Scholar

126 Okumura, Takie Seventy Years of Divine Blessings (Honolulu: T. Okumura, 1940), 41.Google Scholar

127 Department, U. S. of the Interior, A Survey of Education in Hawaii, 111.Google Scholar

128 Ibid., 114.Google Scholar

129 During the conference, a Buddhist priest supposedly boasted that “Democracy is an American philosophy, so that Japanese are not supposed to have the idea of democracy … should we let a teacher who has the idea of democracy, teach our children, it would be our shame.” Okumura, Taiheiyo no Rakuen, 259.Google Scholar

130 Department, U. S. of the Interior, A Survey of Education in Hawaii, 114–15.Google Scholar

131 This was at the first Japanese Education Association meeting on February 23, 1915. The Japanese Education Association, Hawai Nihongo, 22–23.Google Scholar

132 Department, U. S. of the Interior, A Survey of Education in Hawaii, 115.Google Scholar

133 Ibid., 115. A special session of Japanese Education Association was held in August 1915 to discuss the compilation of a new textbook series based on the present Monbusho (the Japanese Ministry of Education) textbooks. The guidelines for the compilation were following. 1) The purpose of the Japanese language school is to teach standard Japanese and develop students’ morals. 2) The teaching subject is the Japanese language only. However, other subjects (such as sewing, singing, physical education and abacus) can be added if necessary. Special attention was drawn to the treatment of historical materials incorporated in a reading. It was decided that it should cover the events and people of both Japan and America, and introduce subjects that can be found in both countries and teach them in relation to both contexts. These policies show that the attitude of the Japanese educators behind the textbook compilation was rather passive; not to defy Americanism, although this was a significant leap for them to abandon the idea of raising Nisei children as Japanese and try to raise them as American citizens.Google Scholar

134 Department, U. S. of the Interior, A Survey of Education in Hawaii, 118–19.Google Scholar

135 Ibid., 116.Google Scholar

136 Ibid., 125–33.Google Scholar

137 Ibid., 135.Google Scholar

138 Ibid., 134–37.Google Scholar

139 Ibid., 134.Google Scholar

140 Ibid., 139–42.Google Scholar

141 Ibid., 142.Google Scholar

142 Thurston, Lorrin A. The Foreign Language School Question: An Address to the Honolulu Social Science Association, November 8, 1920 (Honolulu: n.p. 1920), 17.Google Scholar

143 Hunter, Buddhism in Hawaii, 127.Google Scholar

144 Halsted, “Sharpened Tongues,“ 95–96.Google Scholar

145 Ibid., 97.Google Scholar

146 A companion bill, Act 36, specified criteria for non-English language schoolteachers to obtain certificates from the DPI by exams on English and American ideals. Ibid., 98.Google Scholar

147 Bell, Reginald Public School Education of Second-Generation Japanese in California (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1935; reprint, New York: Arno Press, 1978), 20.Google Scholar

148 U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Japanese Immigration Hearings. 66th Congress, 2nd session, 1921 (Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1921; reprint, New York: Arno Press, 1978), 240.Google Scholar

149 Claxton, Bunker to November 20, 1919, HSF.Google Scholar

150 Hunter, Also see Buddhism in Hawaii, 125.Google Scholar

151 Claxton, Weaver to January 27, 1917, HSF.Google Scholar

152 The Department of the Interior was not only home of the Bureau of Education, but also oversaw administration of United States territories.Google Scholar

153 Ozawa, Hawai Nihongo Gakko Kyoikushi, 99.Google Scholar

154 Okihiro, Cane Fires, 67.Google Scholar

155 Miyasaki, “Schooling of the Nisei in Hawaii,“ 21; Fuchs, Hawaii Pono, 266.Google Scholar

156 Tamura, Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity, 149.Google Scholar

157 Bourdieu, Pierre Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste, trans. Richard Nice (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984), 437.Google Scholar

158 Tamura, Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity, 157–58. Italics added by the author.Google Scholar

159 An annual series of “New Americans” conference between 1927 to 1941 conducted by Okumura aimed first to Americanize the Issei but later targeted coming-of-age Nisei to raise awareness of themselves as new American citizens; what they could do to fulfill their responsibilities as American citizens. The actual purpose of the conference, however, was to encourage the Nisei to choose a career as workers in the sugar and pineapple plantations, “‘the most stable industry’ in Hawaii.” Tamura, Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity, 131.Google Scholar

160 Pan-Pacific Union, First Pan-Pacific Educational Conference (Honolulu: Pan-Pacific Union, 1921): 3.Google Scholar

161 Claxton, Bunker to December 23, 1919, HSF.Google Scholar

162 Tamura, Americanization, Acculturation, and Ethnic Identity, 149.Google Scholar

163 Ibid., 148–50.Google Scholar

164 Department, U. S. of the Interior. A Survey of Education in Hawaii, 134.Google Scholar

165 Although there was no mass forced relocation of Japanese Americans in Hawaii, Japanese language school principals in Hawaii were among the community leaders detained during World War II. Okihiro, Cane Fires, 209, 218.Google Scholar

166 My larger study of the attack on Japanese language schools also compares the situation in Hawaii and the West Coat in order to examine the various agendas behind the attacks. See my paper “The Issei Challenge to Preserve Japanese Heritage during the Period of Americanization,” in Nikkei disAppearances: Twentieth Century Japanese Americans and Japanese Canadians in the Pacific Northwest, eds. Louis Fiset and Gail M. Nomura, (forthcoming).Google Scholar