The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1860-04-26
John Z. waterhouse Is. William Web.Icr,
Collector of Taxes for Honolulu.

The long vexed "Waterhouse Case came of on
Saturday last before the Supreme Court and a jury, in
the form OF an action of repierln, Mr.. Warehouse
suing Mr.. Webster for restitution Of the goods dis
trained By the latter for taxes.
Mr.. Harris, the counsel for Mr.. Warehouse, said
that his client did not deny his obligation to pay
taxes and support the government. He only con-
tended that they must be assessed and collected in
strict conformity to the law.
Thomas Spencer sworn-Testifed to Mr.. Webster's
distraining twenty English saddles, one Mexican do,
and twelve bundles of blue flannel shirts, for the pay
ment of plaintiff taxes. Witness thought that at
that time plaintiff asked defendant to produce his au-
thority; he did not co it. Plaintiff protested that
the assessment was irregular and too large. Plain
tit rests.
Mr.. Bates then took the ground that the plaintiff,
having admitted that Webster had taken the property
under color of his Office, it was an admission of a
pri1aa tlcie case in defendants favor, that it must be
presumed that n public officer in the discharge Of his
duty proceeds according to the law, and the burden
of proof to the contrary lay upon the plaintiff. Every
citizen was under obligations to pay the taxes Of his
government. Webster was not under the necessity
o: showing his authority or his tax roll; if he were,
it would be utterly impossible to collect the taxes. 1t
was the duty of the Tax-Collector TO collect according
20 the roll placed in his hands.
The Court ruled that the Ta1-Collector would be
obliged to show his authority so far as the assessment
roll, just as the Sheriff would show his execution.
Mr.. Bates called J. II. Brown to the stand, and
asked him if Mr.. Webster was recognized as Tax-Col-
lector on the 18th of February last:
Mr.. Harris objected to proving Mr.. Webster's Office
by evidence of general reputation; his legal appoint
ment must be shown. Mr.. Brown gave testimony
about hearing the plaintiff speak Of defendant as the
Tax collector. Mr.. Harris admitted that VI. kekua-
naoa was the Governor Of Oahu, and that he was
absent on the 25th of October last, and that the sig
nature TO the paper appointing K II. Davis LIeuten-
II t-Goyernor of Oahu IN his absence, was the gov
ernor's. Mr.. Bates further introduced the commits
sion of the collector. Mr.. Harris-it must be shown
that the signature and approval were made at the
date they purport.1 The Court said the commission
sufficient for d primG tacie case 10 go to the jury.
Mr.. Bates read from the Government Gazette the no.
Of Webster's appointment. Mr.. McCoughtry,
Of Public Accounts, testified that Webster
acted as Tax-Collector, had fled a bond, &c. 1t
was the custom Of the Finance Department TO pass
the assessment rolls Immediately to the Tax-Collectors
upon fling of their bonds, without sending them
through the governors hands. Nh. Bates profered
The commissions Of the Assessors. [Objectei by Mr..
Harris that they had not the approval Of the King,
Is required By section 40 Of the Code Reptile J, that
I was for the plaintiff to show they had not been ap-
proved 10y the King; otherwise, it would be necessary
or the King TO endorse every such commission and
.lwsys to come into Court snd prove il '