The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1886-07-21

WEDNESDAY
July Dist.
THE LEGISLATURE.

The Legislative Assembly yesterday
spent the greater part of the sitting con-
sidering the Internal Tax bill in Com
mittee of the Whole. The first section
was discussed in almost every possible
aspect, until at length Mr. Aholo came
to the rescue and moved a substitute,
which is simply recital of the defini-
ton of realty in the present law, with
the addition of wharves and fences. The
substitute was adopted after division.
The second section, defining personal
property, was then considered, and there
was a repetition of the preceding debate,
with mere difference of terms. Mr..
Dole moved substitute which was re-
jected on division. 1t was a general
description which might mean anything
or nothing, according to the adroitness
OF the owner of property to conceal its
existence. Mr. Dole defined personal
property as consisting of all kinds OF
property not described as realty. This
he thought was sufficient, and very
great improvement upon the present
law, which he had previously described
as perfect. His substitute, therefore,
was kind of double superlative in the
way of tax law; but his argument
against the taxation of solvent credits,
promissory notes, bonds and other evil
dence of indebtedness, fishing and
water rights, as well as other kinds of
ha oh
conclusively that his object was to enact
a law to facilitate tax Sinking, and to
render the duties OF Tax Assessor irk-
some, meddlesome and abortive The
Assessor would have been compelled,
under Mr.. Dole's substitute, to discover
every bit of property and assess it. This
would have opened a gateway to fraud
and collision. The Treasury would
have been defrauded of its just dues and
corruption would have fourished Mr..
Dole may deny that this was his object,
as indeed he did inferentially, but the
entire Drift of his repeated arguments upon
the section and proposed amendment
was in that direction. The committee,
sonat property as a guide to the Assessor,
and rejected Mr.. Dole's substitute.
The Attorney General made an able
argument in support OF the section as
printed, and moved the addition OF
mortgages, contracts, bonds and notes.
His points and illustrations were well
taken and forcible, but the committee
rejected his amendment after j sharp
debate. There was an impression that
inasmuch as the capital invested in
mortgages is chiefly held at Honolulu,
therefore these instruments would be
assessed in this city and not in the dis
tricts where the mortgaged prop
critics are located. Although this
did not necessarily follow, it had
its influence on the votes. The
strongest opposition to the amendment,
however, came from the capitalist class,
who would be compelled to pay the tax
on mortgages under the proposed amend
ment, while they may contract that the
borrower should pay it under the pres
ent law. 1t was not so much opposition
to a mortgage tax, therefore, as it was a
struggle to compel the borrower to pay
the tax in addition to interest on the
amount of his debt
A strong fight was also made against
taxing credits and notes, and His Excel
lency Mr.. Dare spoke effectively in support
of such taxation. Some speakers of the
Opposition went so far as to argue that
solvent credits and promissory notes !
are not property, although convertible /
into cash. Now, if there be principle /
of taxation more clearly established than
another in all intelligent self-governing |
communities it is the one in question, |
namely, that solvent credits, in what
ever shape they may exist, are personal /
property and should be taxed at their
face value.
1t was argued that as there was liza
biIity that debts might not be collected
and that notes might be dishonored,
therefore neither should be taxed. But
f this argument be good for anything, it