The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1886-08-10

little if any change was needed, and it be-
came law in 1882. It has been found
difficult here, as elsewhere, to make salts
factory changes in the tax laws, and the
greatest difficulties perhaps, are to so
frame them as to guard against evasion on
the one hand, and double or excessive tax
alton on the other The principle of the
present law accomplishes both OF these
ends, as we'll as any with which l am ac
quainted. The principle is that all prop
erty mast be once taxed and once 0nly, That
property only behind debts gives them any
value-and that mortgages, notes and
credit accounts are only the evidences and
acknowledgements of the debtors liability
to the creditor, which the latter may use
under the law, to attach the formers prop
erty to pay the debts, if not paid when
they fall due-that these ecideaces are not
property and if the property itself is taxed,
then the Government has no further
claim, and that to tax both the property in.
the debtors hands, and the evidences in
the creditors, is double taxation. Every
credit in the Kingdom has correspond
ing debt, and the aggregate of all the
credits is represented by just the same ag-
gregate amount of debts, and the debts
were all contracted because of the credit
or's faith in the property in possession OF,
or under the control of the debtors. Sup
pose this property all to have been assessed,
IN conformity with the present law, would
it be right to assess the creditors for the
evidences they held of the claims upon
the property, conditioned upon the nom
payment to them of the debts by the own
ers have heard the objection to the as
sessing of all property, wherever found,
to the party in possession, that much would
escape taxation by being hidden away. /
cannot see that this method would offer
any greater facilities for secreting prop
erty to elude the assessor, than the effort
to get correct list of taxable property for
any other method. cannot suppose that
none will escape taxation that ought to be
taxed, nor can / suppose there is so uni
versal state of dishonesty as many re
marks in the discussion of this subject has
seemed to imply.
I am not prepared to admit that most
business men would stoop to fraud to es-
cape fair and Just taxation, which would
be an equal wrong to knowingly enforcing
a double taxation. Either would be a
violation of law, perhaps equally wrong,
certainly either would be wrong. l said
last week, that it was to be expected that
the returns of personal property in Homo
lulu, would show falling off, upon the
exchange of the last, for the present
method of assessment equal to the amount
of the mortgages, notes and solvent credit
accounts dropped from the personal prop
erty list, and the amount of assessed taxes
equal to the double taxation previously
and illegally collected, for if the intent of
the law was fulfilled. double taxation would
be prevented, and in all such cases, taxes
would, under the present law, be collected
only on one dollar now, where they were
unlawfully collected on two dollars before,
but as every credit has its corresponding
debit, and the credits are not returned as
property, there are no debts to be deducted
from the returns for the debts For ex
ample-under the old lac, A-living in
III o-inventories his property for $4,000
but he owes B-iving in, Honolulu, $5,-
000,which he deducts from the $4,000
and returns $1,000 to the the assessor of
Hilo-B living in Honolulu, inventories
his property for $4,000, and adds his note
against A for $1,000, and returns to the
Honolulu assessor $4,000. This is under
the old law, and pays the Government
on $4,000, OF property, all there is, on
$4,000 in Hilo, where there is $4,000 in
possession, and $4,000 in Honolulu,
where there is only $1,000 in possession,
but the note is added here and deducted
there, which makes the result all right
Under the present law, A returns $4,000
at Hilo, to the assessor, but does not de
duct his note B returns $1,000 at Homo
lulu, but does not put IN the note, the re-
suit is TIE same as before, $4,000 of in
ventoried property, all there is, under either
method, and it all pays taxes alike. The
present law seems to me the simplest, less
liable to misconstruction and abuse, and
more likely to do full and equal justice to
the tax payers and Government, and
though it may perhaps be improved in its
details unless the improvement is SO ap-
parent as to command large vote of the
more experienced and intelligent business
it had better be let alone. The
subject is one not well understood even by
the well educated of older countries, not
especially educated in political economy.
Hence, the years of discussion, by men Of
high intelligence, and learned in the law,
as well as in political economy, in England
and the United States, and Continental
Europe. And hence i deprecate change
in any tax system that works well, lest it
should be made worse instead of better.
Honolulu, July 28, 1886.