The Hawaiian gazette., 1891-08-11

the principle that all laws and, a fer
tori, all regulations that have the
force of law, shall be published. They
should be framed in a manner that
they speak for themselves, and pur-
port to be regulations made in pur-
suance of the statute and have the
force of law.
We are unable to hold in favor of
the position taken by the Govern
ment in this case, that the regula-
tions printed on the blank returns
furnished to taxpayers are either
framed so as to be authoritative or
that they have been published so as
to be obligatory.
But it is urged by respondent that
the return in question does not COM
ply with the statute Section 80,
Compiled Laws, page 123) that re-
quires statement of the "descrip-
tioD, situation and value" of the real
and personal estate, belonging, etc.
The return states the number of
acres of each kind of land, to wit,
2161 acres of cane land and their
value at $4,000 per acre; 2167 acres
of bush and waste land at S1.00 per
acre. Total, 1928 acres. And on
another schedule, c., the names of
ten lands, under the heading LANDS
and parts held in fee simple by the
Hilo Sugar Company, with the gross
acreage repeated as above.
The cane lands in schedule A are
further classified 1868 acres crop
cane.
$40 Un-ground.
$50 Young plant.
1876 Young stools.
Another schedule B, gives the
names of the lands leased TO the
Hilo Sugar Company the names Of
the lessons and the statement that
the company covenants to pay taxes
on these lands and that they are
returned among the cane lands In
the body of this return"
The schedules have blanks which |
were not flied by the plaintiff for
the numbers of the royal patents and
of awards of the Land Commission,
yield in tons of sugar per
acre, and in the schedule for leased
lands are columns also for rent per |
acre, term and time of expiration of |
lease. The respondent has treated |
the statement in question as no re-
turn with the particulars required |
by law, and has undertaken to doom |
the plaintiff because the columns in
the schedules requiring the numbers
of the royal patents and awards,
etc, are not filled out. We regard |
this as unwarranted.
The statute requirements of "des-
cription, situation and value" were
with by the plaintiff in
giving the particulars it did give.
If the amount of the property or
the valuation were deemed INSULT
3ient by the assessor he was author
zed to add to the amount and in
crease the valuation, and if this was
not conceded by the plaintiff corpo-
'ation it had the right of appeal and
before the appeal board, on the
proofs taken, it would be made to
appear which was right.
Holding as we do that the parti-
,ulars required by the printed
blank returns were not authorized
~ valid regulation of the Minister
If Finance and that the plaintiff
company has complied with the par
iculars required by the statute in
he statement made, We do not
eel called upon to say if rule re-
Luiring taxpayers to give details of
heir titles to real estate and esti-
mates of the prospective yield of
heir growing crops wonld be in con-
of the statute.
The plaintiff corporation has been
enied its appeal from the increased
ssessment. The Tax Appeal Board
as been dissolved by effiux of time, {
nd the plaintiff has no remedy ex-
ept that prayed for in the bill. Let
his be granted it.
F. M. Hatch for plaintiff; a. P.
'eterson for respondent.
Honolulu, July 9th, 1891.