The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1893-09-27
OPINION OF THE COURT BY JUrD, CO.

The Minister OF Finance assessed
stamp duty upon the car licenses
of the Hawaiian Tamways Company.
The Company being dissatisfied
Herewith, the question is referred to
this Court upon case duly made
and furnished by the Minister OF
Finance.
The Hawaiian Tramways Company
il corporation operating a street
railway in Honolulu under the provl-
sions of Acts of the Legislature,
Chapter XXXIV. of the Laws of
1884 and Chapter XVIII. of the
Laws of 1886. The Company has
eighteen cars, the licenses for
which the Minister of Finance
claims are subject to a stamp duty
In accordance with the provisions of
Chapter CHI of the Laws of 1892
and has assessed the stamp duty
upon them. The company claims
that the assessment Is unlawful on
the ground that said cars are ex-
empt from all charges for licenses or
stamp duties except such as are ex-
pressly provided in Section IL of the
Act of 1884, Chapter XXXIV. This
section reads as follows: "Said Will
liam II. Austin his associates and
assigns or successors shall pay In
annual payments to the Department
of the Interior the sum of ten dol
lars per annum as a license tax upon
each passenger car used by him or
them, and no greater sum snail be
exacted as car license"
It is claimed in behalf of the Com
pany, appellant, which holds the fran
chise from VIM. r. Austin, that the
rating by the Legislature of the
annual fee for the license of each
passenger car at ten dollars aud no
more excludes these licenses from
the operation of the general law
which imposes a stamp duty for tae
purpose of revenue upon all licenses
issued from the Interior Depart
ment or from any other department.
of the Government.
We do not think that the Act
which conferred the franchise OF
operating a street railway upon the
appellant Company and which estaD-
lished the annual license tax upon
each Of its passenger cars at ten dol
lars is of any greater obligation or
solemnity In respect to the license IN
question than any other Act OF the
Legislature imposing a license fee
upon any business or occupation.
The Legislature imposes the tax In
both instances. When the franchise
was granted to this Company In
1884, and renewed in 1886, there was
In existence the Stamp Act OF 1876,
which prescribed that there should
be due and payable the sum of one
dollar for stamp duty upon licenses
issued from the office of the Minister
of the Interior, or other Government
department"
The car license in question issues
from the Office of the Minister of the
Interior because Section IL OF the
Act of 1884 requires the fee for 1T to
he Maid to the Department OF the
Interior; and from the nature OF the
case n license must issue not only to
show that the fee has been paid but
that the car is in fact licensed.
We place no Importance upon the
Ianouape of Section IL, that mo
Greater sum shall be exacted as car
license" If these words We're not IN
the law and it merely prescribed ten
dollars as the license tax no greater
sum could be exacted, so long as this
tariff remained unchanged by the
Legislature. The statute does not
saw that the payment of ten dollars
shall be in full discharge of the IL
cense tax and any stamp duty now or
hereafter to be levied upon licenses
for vehicles for transportation OF pas
senpers. The statute contains no
reference to the stamp duty upon the
license. 100,
The Legislature of 1892, in Chap
ter CHI, amended the Stamp Act by
imposing sliding scale of stamp du-
ties upon licenses, graduated &C
cording to the amount of the fee Tor
such licenses. The car licenses In
question are not exempted from
stamp duty by this Act or by any law
of this country, and we therefore de,
eide and adjudge that the annual
licenses of the passenger cars OF tne
Hawaiian Tramways Company are
assessible with the stamp duty IN &C
cordance with the provisions OF Chap-
ter CHI, Laws Of 1892.
p. Neumaun for the Company, aP-
pellant; Attorney General w. ".
Smith for the Government, respon-
dent. 49,, 700.