MAGAULI, TOAMALAMA, UAINE
and PATOLO, Plaintiffs
v.
SAVE of Leone, Defendant
No. 10-1933
High Court of American
Samoa
Civil
Jurisdiction, Trial Division
[Matai Name: "Tuitele"
of Leone]
December 5, 1933
__________
Action to declare matai.
High Court, Chief Justice E. C. Johnson, presiding, held that plaintiff Uaine was entitled to hold the name "Tuitele".
Judgment for plaintiff/objector
Uaine.
Matai
Titles-Registration of Titles-Registered Titles
Matai title "Tuitele"
is one of the oldest and most important titles in Samoa;
several of the Tuiteles having been classed as kings.
The High Court convened at the Courthouse in Fagatogo on Tuesday, December 5th, 1933 to hear the above
entitled action.
Presiding: Chief Justice, E. C.
JOHNSON.
DECISION
This is the matai name case Tuitele.
The registration for the name was filed by Save on June 18th, 1933. Objection
to the registration of this name was filed by Magauli
or Tulifua on June 22, 1933. A further objection was
filed by one Toamalama to both previous candidates on
June 27, 1933. A still further objection was filed by Uaine
to all of the candidates on June 30, 1933. And a final objection was filed by
one Patolo on July 8th, 1933 to all of the candidates
concerned. Therefore we have five candidates contesting each other's right to
the matai name Tuitele of the Western District.
Unfortunately the above mentioned candidates
could not compose their differences after the Court had waited several months
in order that the Samoans could arrive at some decision as to who the next Tuitele should be. Therefore this case was set down for
trial on Tuesday December 5th, 1933 and full testimony was taken as to all of
the candidates' rights to the name Tuitele.
The questions for consideration and determination
by the Court are (1) the right of succession to the title of TUITELE, and (2)
the determination of a successor out of the several claimants. The trial
likewise calls for an opinion and decision concerning. certain
alleged Samoan customs and rights.
After listening to the testimony it is evident
that the TUITELE is an old name. Several of the holders of this name in years
past have been classed as "KINGS" of Tutuila. To be sure, at the present time it is
one of the most important matai names, and the name TUITELE is one of [1ASR511]
highest Chiefs in the District of Falelima West, Tutuila. Tuitele-Toomata-Penitila,
one of the last TUITELES and a District Governor of the Western District, died
about the year 1902, leaving a widow and several sons and daughters. It seems
that a few days before his death he created his son Salatielu,
then a "Fitafita," "TOOMATA" a
princely title of the Samoans which was held by the late Tuitele
his father. At that time that is to say in or about the year 1902 the matter of
the selection of a new TUITELE was presented to the High Court for
determination since there were many contenders for the title and their
differences could not be composed in favor of anyone particular candidate. The
Court after listening to what appeared to be much testimony and little evidence
handed down a decision signed by Judges Gurr and Mauga which provided in part as fo1lows-"The present 'Toomata' is a young man (referring to Salatielu),
enlisted in the service the United States Navy. He has also stated that he did
not wish now the title of his father, 'Tuitele', and
as Atofau, Save, Maiava and
Leoso and Toomata signified
their desires to accept either Atofau, Save or Maiava as may be decided by the Court to assume the title,
it is the opinion of the Court, for the considerations, opinions and facts
hereinbefore stated, that for the present the title should be vested in Save
during his lifetime, or during good behavior, and at his death or earlier
divesting of the title, the title should go to Toomata
xxx.".
Tulifua commonly known
as John Magauli one of the candidates who objected to
Save offering the name Tuitele registration testified
that he was a descendant of one Taivai, who held the
name Tuitele, the said Taivai
being a half brother of Tuitele Penitila.
He further testified that Toomata Tulifua
first married the daughter of Lotoau and that they
had a son who was Taivai. Taivai
then married [1ASR512] with Miliama
who was the daughter of Poloa of Leone and as a
result of this union they had a son who was Vuga and
a daughter known as Pologa and still a further
daughter Vaotupu. Vaotupu
was married to Maugalei and as a result among other
children that were born from this union the claimant Tulifua
or John Magauli was their son. There is additional
testimony indicating that Taivai married Miliama and as a result of this union several children were
born among them being one Va,
a female descendant. It appears further from the testimony that Talamaivao, a man from Upolu, Western Samoa married Va and as a result of this union
the claimant Tulifua or John Magauli
was born. It would appear from the testimony of this claimant that he is
without a doubt a descendant of a former holder of the name Tuitele,
and the testimony indicates that he is a descendant through the female side of
a former holder of this name. Leoso and Atofau presented as their candidate one Toamalama.
Leoso introduced in evidence a written statement
concerning the history of his right to name the candidate Tuitele.
Leoso claims the pule of this name and claims that he has the right
to select the holder of the matai name Tuitele. Leoso further claims that he is one of the original
founders of the Town of Leone.
That he as one of the original founders of this Town claims the right to choose
the next Tuitele and all the authority with reference
to this title was vested in him. It appears that one of the original holders of
the title Tuitele lost his title in a game of lafoga and it further appears that for several generations
there was no titular head of the family and that Leoso
exercised authority. It does not appear contradicted that Leoso
who was designated the "Matua" or
"Head Tulafale" of the Chief Tuitele who was deprived of this title in the game of
quoits, exercised considerable control of that district surrounding Leone on
the Island of [1ASR513] Tutuila. After this title was lost by virtue
of the aforementioned circumstances it appears that the old Leosos
made several attempts to regain the title and were subsequently successful and
one Toomata Talae son of Somea once more acceded to the seat of his fore-parents and
was called "Tuitele”; Leoso
still retaining his position was "Matua" or
head of the family. It cannot be doubted that Leoso
one of the highest talking chiefs in Samoa
originally exercised considerable influence in the selection of the Tuitele, however, it does not appear that the name Leoso has exercised any influence over the selection of the
Tuiteles over the last half century. Atofau, a representative head of the division of the Tuitele family, likewise supported the candidacy of Toamalama in conjunction with Leoso.
It appears that Atofau is the head of the family
which is part of the Maiava family and it is through
his connection with Maiava that he claims a right to
the name Tuitele. It would appear that Atofau and Leoso in support of
their candidate Toamalama as well as other candidates
have not thoroughly become embued with a certain
resolution which was presented to the Fono by the
Samoan people in the year 1930, which resolution provided that only those with
the best hereditary right shall succeed to a matai name. The Court considers
this resolution to have the full force and effect of law and the decisions in
the past few years have been rendered in accordance with the wish of the Samoan
people as expressed in the Fono of 1930. The last
holder of the name Tuitele was one Salatielu a son of Tuitele Penitila by his third marriage with one Vao
of Iliili. It should be noted here that Save succeeded
to the title Tuitele after Tuitele
Penitila died, and held the said title until his
death a few years later whereupon Salatielu the son
of Tuitele Penitila
succeeded to the matai name. [1ASR514] The
next candidate to object to Save filing his name for registration as Tuitele was one Uaine, a faifeau of the L.M.S.
Church living at Atauloma. From the statements made by Uaine
on the stand and which were uncontradicted it appears
that he is the son of Tuitele Penitila
a former holder of the name in controversy. As aforesaid, it further appears
that Tuitele Penitila was
married at least four times and that Uaine the
candidate or claimant for the name was born as the result of the union of Tuitele Penitila with one Tuamauga of Fagaitua. In the
contradicted testimony it would appear that Uaine is
a half brother of Tuitele Salatielu,
the last holder of the name Tuitele. Tulifua, otherwise known as John Magauli,
during the trial of this case contested the right of Uaine
to succeed to the name on the ground that he was not a blood son of Tuitele Penitila, a former holder
of the name. Tulifua was cautioned by the Court that
if he made such a statement before the Court could take cognizance of said
statement he would have to introduce proof to show that Uaine,
a contender for the title, was not a blood son of the late Tuitele
Penitila. Whereupon, Tulifua
said he would later introduce testimony showing that his contention was true.
No testimony was introduced discrediting Uaine and Uaine's evidence or his contention for the title as given
on the stand, therefore it must stand as correct. The
next candidate to object to Save offering the name for
registration was one Patolo who claimed that he
descended from Tuitele Faiivae
Sipai. Fua who championed
the candidacy of Patolo testified that when Atofau Leie married the daughter
of Alaiasa of Upolu they
had two children as a result of this marriage, a son named Leoso
Ena and a daughter Matamanu.
Utuga married Matamanu and
as a result of this marriage a son was born who was named Tuitele
Tafaivalu. Then one Sailua Faiivae married Matamanu and had
a daughter [1ASR515] Sailauasu. One Alemasalanoa of Falefa married Sailauasu and they had a son who was Faiivae
Sipai. Tuitele Faiivae Sipai married the
daughter of Savea and as a result of this union a
daughter by the name of Motu was born. Tuitele Faiivae Sipai then married one Toso and
they had a daughter who was Tausoa who Fua claimed was his mother. Tuitele
Faiivae Sipai so the
testimony indicates again married Sulifa and they had
a son who was named Sipai. It further appears from
the testimony that Tuitele Faiivae
again married one Sina and as a result of this
marriage Patolo, a claimant to the name Tuitele, was born. If the testimony of Fua
is to be considered correct, and it has not been shown otherwise, it would
appear that Patolo is a descendant of the former
holders of the name Tuitele.
Save, who originally filed the name for
registration on June 18th, 1933 testified as follows
as to his right to the name Tuitele. He claims that Tuitele Leoo married with Sina, and that as a result of this union a son was born who
was named Tuitele Vaemalenoo.
This son later married one Vaoalii and they had a son
who was called Tuitele Niuumi.
Tuitele Niuumi then married
one Matauaina and a son was born to this couple who
was called Tuitele Vaema. Tuitele Vaema then married Saiautai and a son was born who was Tuitele
Seuluulutavai. This son married a woman of Fagaitua and as a result of this marriage Tuitele Faasala was born. Tuitele Faasala married one Vaomaomao and as a result of this union a son Savevava was born. Savevava then
married and a daughter was born to him by the name of Tomuailemotu.
Salanoa of Fagasa then
married this daughter and they had a son who was Tuitele
Tumasitoga. Save claims that his
right to the name in dispute comes from the first Tuitele
right down to Tuitele Faasala
which Save descends from. He further contends [1ASR516] that
there have been many holders of the name Tuitele from
his branch.
Preceding the last holder of the name Tuitele, and by virtue of the decision rendered by Judges Gurr and Mauga in 1902, Tuitele Save held the name for a period of several years
until the last Tuitele, Salatielu,
acceded to this title at the death of Tuitele Save.
It appears from the evidence that the present Save does not contend that he is
a descendant of the recent Tuitele Save and it
further appears that the present Save is not a descendant from the Toomata branch of the T'uitele
family. In view of the fact that the respective claimants to this name appear
to have traced their ancestry and right to the title from various sources, it
behooves the Court and therefore becomes incumbent upon this tribunal to reply
more or less on certain evidentiary facts which happened within the lives and
life being of certain witnesses appearing at the trial of this case. It is more
or less plain to the Court who the last several holders of the name Tuitele have been, however, in
some instances the respective holders of the title Tuitele
have been disputed. It is clear however to the Court that during the last 25 or
30 years certain known individuals have held the title Tuitele.
The Court dismisses without prejudice the rights of several claimants who have
testified as to their claim arising perhaps a hundred or more years back. The
Court observes that on or about the year 1902 one Tuitele
Penitila was a holder of this important name. That a
few years subsequent to the year 1902 one Tuitele
Save held this matai name, and that at his death some fifteen years ago Salatielu, a son of Tuitele Penitila, succeeded to the title by virtue of a court
decision given about 1902. It is uncontradicted that
the claimant Uaine who testifies that he is a son of Tuitele Penitila by virtue of Tuitele Penitila's marriage with
one Tuamauga as his second wife. The [1ASR517]
claimant Uaine therefore is a half brother of the
late holder of the name Tuitele, Salatielu,
and as such the decision of the Court is that said UAINE had the best right and
claim to the name TUITELE, and the same is hereby awarded to him.
The costs of this case namely $125.00 are to be paid by each of the claimants in equal
proportion-that is to say each claimant must pay the sum of $25.00.
*********