The Honolulu republican. [volume] (Honolulu, T.H.) 1900-1902, 1901-04-26
HAWAII SOVEREIGN IN
ITS LOCAL AFFAIRS
JUDGE EsTEE CONVEYS TIMELY
INFORMATION UNFOLDING
THE STAMP ACT.
Federal Constitution Deals Win Tax
alton for National Purposes-con-
aress Gave Hawaii ssIf-covern-
nent-

Judge Estee rendered an interesting
decision in the United States District
Court on Wednesday wherein the nov
familiar question as TO whether "the
constitution follows the flag" came
under discussion Il was in the case
Of VIM c. Aehi, plaintiff. vs. The Ra-
piOlani Estate Limited. defendant AS
the court states:
This is an action brought for the
specific performance OF a contract for
the purchase and sale Of certain real
estate described in the complaint.
which is valued at $500 600. and it is
alleged that the respondent was to
deliver TO the complainant q good.
sufficient and lawful deed; that, on
tie contrary. respondent rendered TO
the complainant deed which was
not good. sufficient or lawful; that 1t
does not comply with the terms of
Chapter 81 of the Civil Laws OF the
Territory OF Hawaii. in this that il
uoes not bear the Territorial stamps
required by the provisions OF said
law"
Defendant refused to afix the
stamps thus required by the laws of
Hawaii. alleging that under the con-
stitution and laws OF the United States
Of America it is not obliged so to do
In its demurrer the defendant claims
in effect that the stamps already af-
fixed, those required by the United
States constitution and laws, are the
only stamps necessary. The demur-
rer raises the single point as TO the
constitutionality of the laws of the
Territory of Hawaii, imposing stamp
duties on conveyance of real property
It is pointed out by the court that
the Territorial Stamp Act dates back
to 1876 under the monarchy. On argu-
ments that it is contrary to the consti-
tuition in its not being an equal and
uniform tax. because not in force in
the States forming the American Uni
on. Judge Estee says:
Admitting this to be true, the an
swer seems to be that the right of tax
alton for municipal and local purposes
is Unquestioned in the States and Ter
ritories, unless such local taxation
oversteps the restraints which the
Constitution of the United States, or
the laws of Congress, throws as a
shield around the property rights Of
the people. There is no doubt that
the provision in the National Consti-
tuition, which says that all taxation
shall be equal and uniform, relates
solely to taxation for national pur-
poses, and taxation between the
States"
He goes on to show that, while in
the Territories all taxation must be
through direct or implied authority of
Congress, Hawaii has been made q
self-goyerning country by Act of Con-
gress and must maintain itself. 1t
can only do that by some taxation and
this is one kind of taxation.
Attorney General Griggs is quoted
as saying. in a brief in a recent case,
that uniformity as to taxation his
torically meant to protect the States
against inequality imposed upon each
other" And, there was not any rea-
son why that should apply to the 4er-
ritories." They were to be governed
by the discretion of Congress"
at is doubtless true" Judge Estee
proceeds, 'the Constitution reaches
its broad and protecting egis over this
land and over this people, but. except
in rare instances, the Constitution is
not appealed to in local and police
matters. The police powers of this
Territory, like the police powers of
the States, reaches all local and In
cidental matters of moment"
1t is found that the Stamp Act is
one of the Hawaiian laws continued
in force by the Act of Congress.
when Hawaii was annexed" the de-
cision runs, 1T was so annexed with
the implied understanding that the
people of this Territory could and
would. under the direction of Con-
gress. govern themselves and, as 1t
was then a republic, it was supposed
to be capable of government.
Judge Estee shows from authorities
that it has long been admitted law of
our country that a territorial legisla-
ture has the power to lay taxes for
all local purposes and upon property
subject to taxation within its jurisiic-
ton.
THE usual argument that the Con
stitution follows the flag finds but g
faint echo in this case" remarks the
court; but it may be said that il
some things the Constitution does fol
low the flag. but not to the extent
claimed. There are certain personal
rights made secure to all American
| citizens by the Constitution of the
United States, wherever the citizen
may be. which rights have a personal
and not a territorial application.
Some of these privileges are enumer
ated and the comment is made, that:
NO legislation, local or national, car
violate any one of these sacred prin-
ciples They are the immovable mile
stones of American liberty-the great
and neyer-failing shield of American
citizenship"
The familiar judicial doctrine of the
indisposition OF courts TO declare any
law unconstitutional is stated, the
Judge saying: They never do this
unless compelled to do so, and most
rarely laws affecting the revenues, be
cause local government cannot exist
without revenue" At some length the
court reiterates the soereignty OF the
Territory OF Hawaii in matters purely
local II quotes many decisions of the
Supreme Court of Hawaii upholdins
the Stamp Act, and concludes thus:
The people who live here. who pay
the taxes and who expend the money
after collection. know best what !:
needed: 1t IS contrary to the spirit o.
our institutions TO 60 I'VE Thousand
miles TO find out what form of taxa
ton is best suited to this enlightened