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


respective parties hereto which might be the subject of civil
action in the Circuit Court of said Territory That said parties
have agreed the following Statement of Facts which
the controversy depends and without action present herewith
submission of the the Justices of the Supreme Court
of the Territory of Hawaii for their decision, pursuant Sec
tons 125525s Civil Laws of 1884, and Act Is of the Session
Laws of 1885, of said Territory
Second That the plaintiff is resident of Honolulu, in
the First Taxation Division of the Territory of Hawaii
Third: THAT j. W. Pratt is the duly appointed qualified
and acting Collector of Taxes the First Tax
alton Division of said Territory of Hawaii residing in said Ho-
noluu7
Fourth THAT said plaintiff has paid stands ready and
willing pay all levied assessed collected upon his
property pursuant Act 81 of the Session Laws of 1896 for
the years 9ool9o which said include assessed
upon cash hand being income derived by the plaintiff since
the first day of July 1900 and remaining expended the
date of assessment under said Act 81
Fifth THAT the 33rd day of July, 1901 plaintiff duly
made and filed under protest with said Assessor his taxation
pursuant of of Laws of
1901 of the Territory Of Hawaii entitled "An Act Provide
a Tax on Incomes
Sixth: THAT the Of the total income gains and
profits of said plaintiff for the year ending June 30 1901 less
the deductions the provisions of said Act 90
of the of 1901 is the of SIX thousand five
hundred and ortyfve and xtythre onehundredth dollars
$654563) That the of the the income gains
and profits of said plaintiff required be paid by virtue of said
Act 20 the of hundred and thirty and nneyone
hundredth dollars (1309 the being per cent of
the income of said plaintiff provided by said Act
Seventh THAT thereafter, wit the 9th day of Aug
1901, said plaintiff paid the said of one hundred and
thirty and nineyone onehundredths dollars (S1309D the
profits levied and assessed aforesaid said defendant such
Assessor under protest. and with notice that he intended
bring suit the validity of said tax and said plaintiff
hereupon demanded the return him OF said OF hun
ded and thirty and ninety onehundredths dollars $1309
paid aforesaid the ground that said unconsu
tona Illegal invalid and void and the said Assessor theeupon
refused to pay the said sum back % said plaintiff"
Eighth Plaintiff claims that said Act 90 of the Session
Laws of 1901 of the Territory of Hawaii (entled AN Act to
Provide Tax Incomes unconstitutional invalid nopera
tive and void upon the ground that the inconsistent
with not by
United States and Corr by the Organic Act of the Territory of
Hawaii by thereof the said assessed paid
and required aforesaid Illegally assessed and levied and
the said of hundred and thirty and nnetyone
hundredth dollars ($3091 should be returned to this plain
tiff who herewith submits detailed specifications of the grounds
for holding said be unconstitutional invalid imperative
and void said specifications being heeunto annexed and marked
Exhibit 'A'.'
Ninth Defendant claims that said Act 20 of the Session
of the Territory Of Hawaii constitutional and
valid that said legally made that the paid
aforesaid legally required by said defendant such As
SCISSOR, and that said payment should stand as made
The points relied establish the unconstutionay of
the Act follows
l. The provisions allowing only deduction thou
sand dollars from the aggregate annual income from all
bers of family composed of both parents and
minor children husband and wife, and in the case of
guardian of minors in family is inconsistent
with the 14th 9Th Amendments of the Constitution of the
United States"
The provision exempng incomes under thousand
dollars 14th Amendment of the
Constitution of the United States"
of the salaries of the Chief Justice and Associate Justices
of the Supreme Court and Judges the Circuit Courts of the
Territory inconsistent with Section 81 of the
Organic Act and other laws of the United States"
.The provisions of the Act far resulting in the
taxation bonds of the United States Government
ssten with the Constitution and laws of the United States
The provisions of the Act relative Of refusal
neglect make whereby the Assessor may lawfully
any officer of corporation person having pos
of the books of the produce the and
to give testimony under oath respecting any liable to
tax add hundred per the of the
in case fraudulent inconsistent with the 4t 9Th
9Th Amendments the Constitution of the United States
g. "Said Act arbitrarily unreasonably and unawfully
emp persons and property from taxation
T. Said Act is unconstitutional resulting duplicate
taxation for the reason that the income gains and profits de
rived from all real and personal property situate said Ter
rorv is taxed pursuant Sections II and SO of Act
81 of the Session Laws of 1885, heretofore passed and
standing unrepealed"
s. hat the whole Act is unconstitutional invalid, inoper