The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1867-03-02
TIE PACIFIC
Commercial Advertiser.
SATURDAY Y. MARCH >.
aNa1iOn OF the Coolies

On Thursday last in the Supreme Court, the
whole bench being present, an argument was
heard on a submission-h Re, c. II. Levers
and Pakalo Chow. a Chinese laborer, and Hon.
c. c. Harris, for the Treasury. In the submis-
sion, Pakalo Chow sets forth that he contracted
with DR.. Hillebrand. tie agent of the Hawaiian
Government in China, in 1865, under a written
agreement to work five years at a certain COM
P~ensation Per month that at the time of max
ing and signing the contract nothing whatever
was said to him to lead him to suppose that any
tax would be levied on him by the government /:
that he was entirely ignorant Of the laws Of this
country and that in law and in equity lie is not
liable for the taxes which are now demanded of
him. c. IL. Levers ayers that the contract of
service Of Pakalo Chow was assigned to him by
the Board of immigration that in the deed of
assignment there was no provision that he should
pay the taxes OF said cOOlie, nor was any verbal
mention made Of the same: and that in law and
in equity he is not liable for the same.
The Attorney General appeared ON behalf of
the Exchequer. \. f. Judd, Esq, for Mr.. Lew
ers, and j. Montgomery, Esq, for the Coolie.
Without attempting to report the arguments
which occupied several hours-we
compile the most salient points.
Mr.. Phillips commenced by saying that this
matter Of coolie taxation was a ve-y important
one, but in the decision Of it by the Court, the
law only must govern, not questions of govern
mental policy. In the settlement of these ques-
tions, the Legislature was the only authority.
lie held that under the law of the land, the
coolies were subject to taxes equally with any
other class. They were men, not sIareS, neither
could Il contract like the one in question be con-
strued as reducing any man to a condition of
slavery. These Cinnamon were not chattels, but
human beings. and they must be treated as such.
They had all the civil rights and privileges Of
subjects, and were they to be allowed to be ex-
enpt from taxation Aliens as well az subjects
are taxed. The question is rather one between
the other tax payers and these who claim exemp-
ticn, for if this entire class are to be exempted,
the burden would come heavier upon those who
pay, and they would have Il right 10 complain,
for it would be unjust to them. Every man is
bound to assist in the support of the government
under which he lives, either by giving his per-
sonal services or by paying taxes. There has
been no legislation providing for the exemption
of the coolies during seryitude, nor is there any
private contract by any authorized person to that
effect, and no power exists beyond that of the
legislature which can exempt them from the
action Of the law. They cannot escape on the
plea of ignorance-they must have known that
there was some law here they came into the
country voluntarily, and at once became subject
to all the legal obi .atiOns of citizens. If they
are to be considered exempt by reason of the
contract, then the agent Of the Board Of lmmi-
grafton had no authority to make such a con-
,.,1. III, .-.1A..-. Ill = z-.l
authority in contravention of law-t the King
himself cannot alter taxation laws. \ great
principle is here involved. and if this class is to
be exempted, the precedent will be disastrous.
If the enforcement of these taxes is a hardship to
the coolies or to the planters, their remedy is
with the Legislature let them pay and then ask
for relief, and they will probably get it. Per-
haps the coolie may say that he has made an inn
p~royident contract-if so he cannot ask for relief
in this extraordinary way. NIr. p. read from
various authorities in support Of his argument.)
Mr.. Montgomery, for PakalO Chow, said: He
had been informed by DIR. Hillebrand that no
taxes are levied upon this class in China, and
Mr.. VI. argued that they did not suppose, nor
had any reason to suppose when they engaged to
come here that they would have any taxes to
pay. 1t is clear flat they came here utterly
ignorant a. to this matter. Why We're they not
informed 10y the Board of Immigration Oh their
arrival? They have a right to think that they
have been aggrieved. 1t was unfortunate that
DR.. Hillebrand or the Board instructing him did
not mention the matter of taxes, but the silence
Of the DR.. should not work against these igno-
rant and half barbarous people The strict rule
Of the common law in constituting contracts
49,. l., .TI.-.l =. -z-s.I 4.
The agent sent to procure them went clothed
with the authority and prestige of Il high gov
crnment oficial-a Royal Commissioner and the
Chinese undoubtedly viewed him in that light,
and entered into the contracts with full conf
dence of fair play. 1t was the duty of the Com
missioner to have told the coolies all the facts
everything that was expected of them. But lie
withheld what he ought to have told-he left
them in ignorance-and now government comes
in and claims to tax them. The matter of taxes
should have been inserted in the contract. The
omission was an important one, for what is not
in the contract must be excluded from its opera
ton. The laches of the government should
operate in favor of the coolies. What they ask
for is not an absolute release from taxation. hut
a suspension of the law during the term of their
contracts. The consequences which must result
from enforcing the collection Of these taxes were
anything but pleasant to contemplate.
Mr.. Judd. for Mr.. Levers, said The assignee
of the contract made by government with the
coolie is not liable for the taxes OF the coolie,
because there was no intimation of such liability
either in the contract itself. or verbally at the
time of the assignment. The planter. for whom
solely Mr.. j. appeared, was entitled. under the
contract. to five entire years of service from the
coolie. Now if government proceeds to take
twenty days service of the coolie every year to