The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1886-10-08

The honorable member moved II DE re
! ceived and referred 10 the Finance Com
mittee
Mr.. Thurston rose TO q point Of order
He thought this was new business ana
therefore not admissible.
Mr. Kaulukou said the resolution
adopted that no new business could De
brought in. referred only 10 bills
Mr.. Aholo moved the resolution be re
ferred 10 the Judiciary Committee.
The President said he was under the inn
preston the resolution stated no new bust
ness could be introduced
Mr.. Aholo said he would like to have the
resolution read.
His Exccllency Mr. Creighton said he
thought the resolution stated new bust
ness. If Mr.. kaulukou had asked to have
the item inserted in the Appropriation bill
it could have been considered.
Mr. Kaulukou then moved a suspension
OF the rules so that the resolution he intro
duced. Agreed to.
The resolution was then referred to the
Judiciary Committee
ORDER OF THE DAY
Third reading OF an Act to amend sec
tons Is and Is, chapter %, OF the Session
Laws OF 1882, relating to the increase of
taxation.
Mr. Dole moved the bill be indefinitely
postponed. 1t was not to the interests of
the members constituents to increase the
taxes. The rate of taxation at the present
time is S25 per head for every man, woman
and child in the Kingdom. 1t Is the rich
man who escapes taxation, and the poor
man who had TO pay the full amount. The
rich mans protection was his wealth, the
poor mans the ballot If this bill passed
he would be in the minority, and could go
back to his constituents and tell them he
had been working for their interests.
Mr. HayseIden moved that the bill pass
He said that it was no afterthought with
him, viz. the bringing in of this amend
ment 50 late in the session. He had
expected to have increased the revenue by
his amendments to the Tax law introduced
by him in the early part of the session.
Those amendments proposed to tax cred
its, notes of hand and other values not
now taxable, but which are taxed in the
United States and many other parts os the
world, but the Opposition was so strong
from Messrs. Bishop, Dole, Thurston and
Castle, representatives of capital, and a
miscOnception OF the principle of taxation
by the native Hawaiian members, that the
amendments fell through. Had they car
ried. there would have been no necessity
for this proposed increase of one quarter
OF one per cent, and the taxes on real and
persanal property. The necessity, how
ever existed for increased revenue, and if
it could not be done indirectly, it must be
done by direct taxation. He said that Mr.
DOle'S statement that the people of this
Kingdom were now taxed at the rate OF
$25 per capita was untrue, and he chal-
lenged him to prove that it was in excess Of
$13 per capita The statement made by
Mr.. Thurston that the plantations were
staggering under a load OF heavy taxation
was also untrue as was also the statement
OF the same honorable member that real
and personal property in this Kingdom
was assessed at its full value. He (the
speaker could state positively, without
fear OF contradiction, that plantation
property in this Kingdom was norassessed
at 80 per cent of its value, and he could
prove his assertions and any member of this
Honorable Assembly could verify his state
ment by an examination of the sworn re-
turns made by corporations doing business
i'll this Kingdom to theInteriOr Department,
which were open to the examination OF
the public. There it would be seen that
the returns sworn to were twice as
large as the returns sworn to by the same
parties for assessable purposes. AS an in
stance of the low valuation put upon plan
tation property he said that Mr.. ThurstOn
as lawyer for a plantation property that
hands in October, 1885, made out
the papers selling the property to the new
purchasers for $587 900, yet the returns
made to the Assessor in July, 1886, for the
same property valued it at $123 900. This
plantation had taken off since the purchase
$500 900 of sugar, and had made a net
profit of $4,000. If the profit or income
were multiplied by eight, as was the rule
with real estate, it would place the valua-
ton of that plantation for assessable pur-
poses at $780, 600, yet the sworn returns
made by the owners was for 1923, 900 only.
This was not an exceptional case, but he
could affirm that in no case was plantation
assessed at more than 80 per cent
of its value. The other day Mr. Thurston
stated that the rule in the United States
was to assess property at % per cent of its
value, and to-day Mr.. Dole states that the
rule in America is to assess on so per cent
of its value. He (the speaker) would raise
him per cent more and say the rule was
66 per cent in the States, though in great
many States of the Union the law was the
same as our own, viz. the full cash val
ne" But, accepting the 66 per cent as
being the rule, we find that man owning
piece of property there worth 5000
is assessed at , per cent on $500 and
pays $500 taxes on the same while
here, if he paid l per cent on the full
5000 he would only pay 50 taxes. just half
what he would have to pay there The
statement made by Mr.. Thurston that
many plantations had become bankrupt
was untrue, and he challenged him to
prove that even one had become bankrupt
and had been closed out He said that
while it was true that through mismanage-
ment some few plantations had changed
hands, yet none had been discontinued,
and that in regard to the statement made
by the same honorable member that all, or
nearly all. were on verge of bankruptcy,
it was also untrue, and could not be sup
ported by facts. The truth was that
nearly all the plantations were paying we'll,
and he cited the plantations of Spreckels-