The Hawaiian gazette., 1889-12-17
DEFENDANTS appeal from the Police
Court of Honolulu.
BEFORE DOLE, J.
Decision.


by the tax collector for the Island
of Oahu, appointed in April, AID.
1889, under the statute of 1888,
amending and regulating i" the law
relating to the appointment and
tenure of Office of tax assessors and
tax collectors and the assessment
and collection of taxes"
He claims ten dollars for taxes
assessed against the person and
property of said defendant on the
books of the assessor of taxes for
the District of Honolulu, Island of
Oahu, for the year 1888, and states
in his testimony that son the tax
collectors book for 1888 for Homo
lulu, book >, p. $50, twenty dollars
is assessed to estate of Watson for
lot on School street."
The defendant testifies that he
made no return in 1888, because
the land was leased, and the tenant
covenanted to pay the taxes; and
that his ward is tenant in common
of one-half of the land.
The defendant claims that he is
not liable for this tax but that the
tenant is liable, both on account of
his covenant to pay the taxes, and
because he was in possession of the
premises also that he is not liable
because the property was not as
seSSed to him but to the estate of
Watson, and thirdly, because the
plaintiff has no authority to bring
this action for taxes assessed pre-
vious to his appointment.
Upon the first point, it is clear to
me that a landlord is liable for the
taxes upon the value of the land.
The statute of 1882 relating to in
ternal taxes, Section SO, makes it
incumbent upon the owner of real
property to make return thereof
to the assessor. And Section rs
provides that 60 the interest of every
person in any property shall be sep
arately assessed, and every person
shall be liable to taxation in respect
Of the full cash value of his inter-
est in such property.
l am aware that there are other
sections of the statute from which
it may be reasonably argued, that
tenants also are required to make
return of real estate in their pos
session under leases, and are there
fore liable for the taxes thereof.
However this may be, there is no
doubt in my mind that landlords
are liable. The fact of the cove
nant OF the tenant to pay the taxes
does not affect the landlords liabil-
ity; such covenant is a private
agreement and does not modify the
methods of assessing and collecting
taxes fixed by law.
AS to the second ground of de-
tense, {. e., that defendant is not
liable because the property was not
assessed to him but to the Watson
estate l find that the law provides
in Section 81, that every executor,
administrator or guardian shall be
assessed separately in respect of
each property or trust which he
represents, and shall be chargeable
with the tax payable in respect
Thereof in the same manner as if
such property were his own, and he
shall be assessed respectively in his
name as representative of the prop
erty or trust he represents. This
provision of the statute has been
disregarded in every particular in
this case. Not only is the property
Of the defendants ward assessed to
the Watson estate instead of to the
defendant, but the interest of the
ward is assessed in a lump sum
with the interest Of the other ten
ant in common instead of being as
sessed separately as required by the
statute. find that such an assess
ment is not binding upon the de-
PENDANT. The case of Wood Us.
I6TTey, administrator, (97 Mass.
1927 supports this conclusion, under
a similar statute. The Court said,
+" The tax not having been lawfully
assessed, and there being no provis-
ion of law which authorizes its col
lection from him, there must be
judgment for the defendant"
Upon the third ground of de-
Tense that the plaintiff has no au-
thority to bring this action, also
find for the defendant. By the
Act of 1888 relating to the assess
ment and collection of taxes, the
assessor created by such Act is re-
CURED to perform the duties for
merly required to be performed by
the tax assessors and collectors I'M
der the old law. These collectors
were appointed annually and it was
among their duties to collect the
annual taxes, that is the taxes as
sessed in the year of their incum-
bency, and their authority for such
collection was the tax list prepared
by the assessor for that year.
There was nothing in the old stat
ute that authorized the collector to
,oll1ok