Polynesian., 1860-02-04

/
Department of the Kings Finances.
Permit me to add my full assurance that you viii SO
deal with all points and principles thus submitted to
you as to add new proof to many others which you
have already gyen Of the Of the appreciation
of your character and talents expressed at page Is Of
the Report which had the honor to make to the Leg
sature Of 1858, well in my Circular Of 4th July
same year, announcing your appointment by the King
| With much respect, have the honor to be, sir,
| Your most obedent humble servant,
R C. WYLLIE.
His Excellency, D. L. GREGG,
Minister of Finance, ETC., etc.
DEPARTMENT OF FINASCE,l
| Jan. %, 1860.
SIR Il have had the honor to receive your letter Of
the 25th inst, enclosing despatch from Her Britannia
MaJesty's Acting Commissioner and Consul General,
which covers q complaint from John Thomas Water
house, ESQ.,, in regard which have been
ed against him under the laws Of this Kingdom.
The high source through which Mr.. Warehouse COM
plans and his respectable standing in the cOmmu-
nifty, require careful consideration of the representa-
| tons he has submitted.
1t is apparent to that Mr.. Waterhouse has mis-
judged in regard to his rights resident Of the King
dom, and also to the proper mode of obtaining
dress for any wrongs he imagnes himself to have
| tanned in cOnnexion Herewith.
Upon the cearest and most positive principles Of in
ernaOnal law, he cannot make his alleged grievances
the subject Of international discussion until he has ap
pealed in vain to the Hawaiian legal tribunals for
4
whether Legislative enactments operative other
Wse,-nOt for individual caprice to determine in
eordance with the suggestions of selfintersst.
Mr. WaterhOuse seems to claim that the provisions Of
the Civil Code, which approved May 18th, and by
its terms went into effect August 1st, 1889, could not
be rghtuly enforced for the present fiscal year to
the assessment and collection of taxes because, by the
provisions of Section 49O, directed to be
appointed on or before the first day OF July in each
year. So far any question be founded on such
point, 1t is evidently for judicial construction.
But there is really question in any just legal sense
The statute in regard to the appointment of assessors
simply directory, and to directory statutes, it has
always been held that time is not absolutely essential
IN respect to their execution. They may be enforced
within the period Of their vitality though they do not
commence to operate at the time named in their
provisions Thus it was competen and lawful for the
Minister of Finance to appoint after the first
of July to carry the taxation laws of the Kingdom
Those laws were binding for the fiscal year,
but the machinery for could not take effect
until the first Of August. Such question must neces-
sary be decided upon construction of the entire pur
port of that portion of the Code, give effect to
the evident intention Of the Legislature. Mr. Water
houses view would deprive the Government of all
enue from internal taxation for the present year,-a
result which he, philAnthropc and public-sprited
resident, would be the first to deprecate.
His deduction from the language of the 1st Section Of
the Code Is evidently erroneous To what does apply'
To future legislative enactments the entire body Of
the Code? In my judgment, it clearly applies to the
the Legislature to guard against the contingency of
local laws hereafter going into effect without the know
edge of those subject to their operation The Civil Code
preseribes rule for ITSELF and that rule is distinctly
laid down in Section 1892.
Mr.. Waterhouse has been subject to no rule of as
sessment which not applicable to every other
payer Of the Kingdom. So far as he complains Of the
want of appeal, the opportunity of revision, he is
placed on no exceptional footing IL he has been lille
gay assessed, the laws of the country afford him.
well as every other resident subject, the Of
ample redress. The courts always open to render
justice to him and all others invoking their protection
But has not Mr. Waterhouse, by his own act, admit
ted the legality Of the assessment against him. and thus
voluntarily yielded up all just ground Of complaint?
Why did he not render to the Assessors valuation Of
his property in Honolulu'
He was of course that the new assessment and
collection laws were published by authority in the
PoiynesiGn the 28th Of May ast for information,
and subsequently in the Hde HdOdi of July 49, 1852
As an intelligent man he comprehended the notice left
with him by the Assessors in August, which required a
return Of his property. He must also have been fully
advised Of the notices in the PosesiGn and Advertiser
Of about the period Perhaps il may also be well
to suggest that is hardly possible for him have for
gotten that the latter paper printed and promulgated
the entire body Of the Code in ample time to advise him
fully of his rights and responsibilities.
enclose a communication from Mr. Pease one of the
Assessors, together with copy Of the notice Mr..
Waterhouse, which sets the whole matter in perfectly
plain light.
II is then entirely manifest that Mr. Wsterhouse can
not claim the benefit of ignorance of the laws his
duties under them. II, he alleges, he has BEEN ex-
eessivey assessed because he did choose to
return valuation Of his property and not from any
disposition the part Of the Government to oppres
him. sE
leave it to yourself to Judge how far he is entitled
to complain Of beneficial exceptions in his own favor
1t may not be too late for the Collector of Taxes to
remedy the difficulty if it should be insisted on as
point ofimportance But the liberty Of making at this
late day. return of property is quite another affair."
which the law does not permit.
The duties Of the Collector are plainly pointed out,
and presume it is his purpose to execute them. III
were disposed, hold power to interfere with his
discretion
You necessarily aware that Mr. Wa,erhouse has
fallen into IN alleging that there was no pro-
mitigation Of the Civil Code before October last and il
is not important that should add to what has already
been said on the subject.
1t does not become me 10 enter into discussion Of
the question of treaty stipulations which Mr. Water
house undertakes to raise yet may perhaps be al
lowed to observe that while foreign residents not
placed on worse footing than his Majestys subjects in
relation to internal taxation, therecan be very great
danger Of successful issue that point against the
Hawaiian Government
There is nothing in the laws Of this Kingdom to war
rant Mr. Waterhouse in imagining that he reduced to
state Of slavery, that his rights dsregared
The taxation law doubt mainly fair and just and
not at all more oppressive than the taxation laws Of
other countries As to its details il Is quite possible
that many defects exist II Mr. waterho1se and those
who agree with him, would address themselves to the
Legislature for notifications else suggest their views
Of policy to the Government, they would be Ear more
likely to promote their interests and add to the
general prosperity of the country. For my part
see theheeessty Of many changes both In regard
assessments and collections and need conveytc
you the that all occasions il win afford me
the highest satisfaction 70 place myself in eommunca-
tiOn with every respectable Of information and
to act upon the knowledge may thus acquire.
With every respect for Mr.. Warehouses; opinions,
IS evident that he have mistaken the proper
forum Of seeking redress for his supposed grievances
There is evidence before that be is the victim Of
wrong, but if it so appeared to him, il his Pvi-
ege to put himself in such position, both here and at
Lahana, to have his views properly investigated IT.