It obviously wasn't, but it's always good to see someone point to the stipulations of an indigenous treaty, while closing both eyes to the context in which it was drafted[1]... Or to the broader context of systemic discrimination that is very actively pissing on people, to this very day.
[1] Reparations for specific, not theoretical damages inflicted on indigenous Hawai'ian people by the government of the United States. But good on you for finding a theoretical[2] loophole! Look, everyone, feast your eyes - Europeans were actually the real victims of discrimination in Hawai'i, circa 1920!
[2] Presumably, there's some European person, somewhere [3], that can prove that half of their family tree[4] traces back to direct decadency from a non-settler European who lived on Hawai'i prior to 1778, and would like to be a beneficiary of the treaty, but isn't actually protected by it!
[3] Somewhere next to a spherical cow, and other pedantic, but utterly theoretical oddities.
[4] Unless you mean to tell us that there was some self-sustaining, secret isolated enclave of Europeans that have lived on Hawai'i prior to 1788, that only intermarried between eachother, I would expect that after a century and a half of intermarriage with native Hawai'ians, nobody either in 1920, or today would ever be able to tell the difference between that 'European' and a native.