The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-09-11


THE FIRST TAXATION DIVISION
ORIGINAL.
sBarrSD AUGUST 10, IDOL DECIDED AUGUST 90 1901
FREAR. CD, GAIBRAITH AND PERRY IT
PARIS without rendering the statute invalid
the inyaldy of certain
income claimed to violate the
Constitutional guarantees against Standardization
seizures and unusual pun
sbments inasmuch taken under those
they would remainder of the
statute
the legislature cannot tax the interest from United
judges the Supreme and
the Territory tax would not
invalid whole though general
may
implicitly inapplicabe objects within
invai part to
affecting the remainder of the law need
The legislature may classify objects of taxation provided the class
merely arbitrary
corporations
class exempting
personal family
allowing similar exemption corporations they
being n
exemption
Invalid ground S
family both and
children wife; and for each
wards comprised in family
deduction shall exceed thou
dollars.
estimating the
may products produced and consumed
by himself and sold. -
legislature lawfully companies in
class by themselves their
persons their
income per their
OPINION OF THE COURT FREAR, CT.
(Galbraith J., dissentng)
The question involved in these that of the validity
nyay of the income law of the present year The facts
the and the points raised set forth IN the DIS
ening opinion of Mr. Justice Galbrath.
The statute taken largely from that OF 1896 winch was
AIKEN largely that passed by Congress m 1894 which IN
largely from those passed by Congress during
the years 1861-1870.
be Federal income tax laws OF 1s61S70 although of
m came before courts minor questions of construction
constittionalty, declared unconstitutional as
boe although they undoubtedly unconstitutional in
of the decisions about to be referred to in connection with
the Federal income tax law of 1894
The Federal income tax law of 1894 held unconstitutional
on the grounds that tax on real personal property
direct tax and that tax upon the income derived from such
property was in reality upon the property itself and
therefore direct taxrom which it followed as matter OF
that the law unconstitutional as to such taxes or
the reason that they not apporoned among the states
according their respective populations; and the tax upon III
real and personal property was 50 important feature
the law that the nvaldsty of that tax having been esta
shed the remaining portions of the law also became Invalid
Pollock D. Farmers d Trust Co., 157 u D 49, 100
p SOL As the constitutional provision which requires tha1
direct taxes when laid by Congress shall be apportoned among
States according their respective numbers has no appnc
to direct tax laid by territorial legislature the oeclsoh
the case Just cited does not affect the present case
The apai;an income tax of 1896 declared uncon
tona on the ground that there unjust discrimination
between incomes over and under $4,000 nasnucn as
the latter were exempt up to $4,000 and the former not exempt
as 10 anv amonnt raneDbtH D. Shao II Haw ~ As the
feature upon which that law held unconstitutional that
does not appear in the present law that decision cannon
Affect the present >. ,ra
let No en consider the present its merits The
upon which is conended that the law IS o s a
grouped by counsel as follows Discrimination oeI"e 1a1
Of the taxpayer; "a Penalties uniawfuly
imposed 5] Taxation Of Salaries of Supreme and Circuit Court
Justices and Judges (6 Taxation Of United States oondG anu o
~ InvaIdity of the Act whole because Oh NV A''
@senial parts c. - tho
Points 3 and 90 will be disposed of first Section o. nder
Act after providing for lists or returns by 'aApsel
h provides in substance that if person OF
fnes negiects to render such return or rehoerS 80