The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1890-05-20

DOLE, j., ABSENT.
An estate having been sold on the 2lst day
of September, with covenant agalnst
membranes, and with no express
agreement concerning the payment OF |
the taxes.
against the owner of the property on |
the first of July preceding, although
the valuation of the property had not
then been determined by the assessor;
Held, that when case has been tried Dy
Justice of the Court with jury waived
the Court in banco will not on bill OF
exceptions review his findings OF facts:
otherwise than it would the verdict OF
the jury.
OPINION OF THE COURT BY M'cULLY, J.
The case, assumpsit, was heard by
Chief Justice Judd, sitting with jury
waived. He found in favor OF the
plaintiff for certain amount under
his claims. The defendant excerpts
to the findings in the fact and law,
by the Justice hearing the case.
The exception to the finding that
the defendant should pay the taxes
involves a question of law which we
will examine first. The language OF
the Court upon this item of claim is
this: 81 think the defendant should
pay the taxes advanced by the plain.
| tiff. The taxes were assessed as OF
the LIST of July, but they were not
payable until the 18th of November,
about two months after the sale.
4 Taxes are an annual charge upon
property by virtue Of law and they
should be paid by the defendant as
the owner of the property on the
same principle that he must pay the
annual rents accruing after the sale"
| The tax referred to is the real
estate and chattel taxes upon the
"Kahuku Ranch" This property
comprises land and buildings, cattle
and horses and other live stock, with
grazing, agricultural and dairy tools
and implements. 1t was sold by
plaintiff to defendant September q,
1883, by deed of warranty and COW
enant that the premises were free
and clear of all membranes.
The plaintiff continued to reside
on the premises demised for some
months after the sale, by an amicable
agreement of the parties, the defend
ant being absent in Honolulu or in
California, and during this time the
plaintiff, among other payments
claimed to be made on defendants
account, paid the taxes.
The contention of the plaintiff is
that the tax was not due, and fixed
charge or lien on the estate sold
until after the date of sale, whereby
it was not an incumbrance which the
plaintiff was bound to pay. The de-
PENDANT to the contrary.
4 The Statutes which relate to the
assessment and payment of taxes az
they stood at the time of the sale, in
respect to dates, are in substance az
follows:
The returns by owners of real and
Of personal property were to be made
as of the first of July. G. L. p. 1913
The assessor was appointed on OF
before the first of July, and it was
his duty to notify residents of his
district to make their returns to him
at designated place and on dates
in the month of July.
The assessor is required to have
his tax list open for inspection from
September Goth to October LIST, and
to give public notice of the time and
place or places for this, and persons
dissatisfied with the taxation may
then take their appeals.
The Courts of tax appeal sit al
appointed times in the month Of
October.
1 The tax collector calls for the pay
ment OF taxes in the month of No
vember and December, not later thar
the 18th of December, after which
date he may levy for unpaid taxes
on sufficient of the goods and chat
tie, or may sue for them.
This Court has held in the
Hilo Sugar Company vs.. The
Minister of Finance, I Haw. 665
that property within the Kingdom
on any part of the first of July was
taxable to the owner, although it was
then on ship board and during that
day was transported abroad, affirm
ing the case of Brewer & Co
VS.. Tax Collector 6 Haw. 554
No stronger case could be present.
ed of the appliation of the liability
which attaches on the first day Of
July. Our Statutes make no differ
ence between real and personal pro
perty in respect to the charge OF the
tax icing upon the owner, at the date
selec4ed for the falling of the tax,
the first of July, although the pay
ment OF the tax upon real estate is
secured Notwithstanding the sale or
transfer Of it by attaching liability
to the real estate itself. The debt OF
the tax is still upon the owner. The
act of assessment must necessarily
be subsequent to the day when the
ownership is fixed. The obligation
| is perfect at that time to pay an
amount which shall be determined
| by the assessor, subject to the action
of the Appeal Board. The assessor
has not to ascertain who may be the
owners Of the property Of his district
at any other date, or at the date OF
the completion Of his assessment list
on or before the 18th Of September.
If that were the case what would be
the force Of the provision that the
ownership shall be reported as it