The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1902-10-22

preached the task OF providing for the
enforcement of its income tax law ii
created measures more drastic than auy
ever proposed by Congdess. The 4th.
9Th and 9th amendments to the United
States Constitution received some
small consideration at the hands of
the Congress but the Hawaiian leg
islature leaped defiantly, with both
feet, upon all Constitutional restrict
tons.
Under the act of Congress. when a
person refused to make a return to
the collector, or was suspected by the
collector of making a false return. it
was the duty of that officer to make a
return according to the best infor-
nation he can obtain by the examina-
ton or such person or other evidence"
Under the Hawaiian law, under sim
liar circumstance, the assessor is given
power to summon the person refusing
to return, or suspected by the assessor
of having made a false return, and
bring his books and papers with him
and compel him to give testimony I'M
der oath. Under the act of Congi ass,
in case of neglect or refusal to make a
return, so per cent. could be added to
the tax as a penalty; and for frau /.
ulent return, 100 per cent.
Under the act of Congress, the pun
ishment for fraudulent return was con-
fined to the money penalty. Under the
Hawaiian law it is made a perjury.
THE essential difference between the
laws is that under the act of Congress
the collector cannot force the tax pay
er to appear as a witness or produee
his books. Yet under Section of the
Hawaiian income tax law the assessor
first demands of the supposed tax payer
a statement under oath of his income.
If, in the opinion of the assessor, the
return of the tax payer is false or
fraudulent, then without an oath or
affirmation, without a warrant, without
describing the books or papers reouir-
ed, the assessor summons his victim
/ to appear before him and bring all his
| books and papers with him.
There, without jury, without a
court, without trial, without being
confronted with the witnesses against
him, without being informed of the
precise nature of the charge against
him, he is compelled to become a wit.
ness against himself, and If, as result
of the inquisitorial and unconstitu-
tional examination, the assessor is no
well pleased with the answers made
1 he finds his victim guilty of perjury
he determines the just valuation o.
the disputed income, adds 200 pei
cent to such just valuation adds II
I per cent. further penalty if the tax il
not paid, and adds interest at pc
cent. on the tax. forfeiture and pen
atty.
The assessor is made by the Law
complainant, judge, principal witness
and high sheriff, all in one.
Section 6 of the Hawaiian incom
tax law is clearly in violation of tn
4th, 9Th and 9Th amendments to tn
United States Constitution.
It was held by the supreme court Q
Hawaii
: Robertson VS.. Pratt, IS Hawaiian
) In a decision supported by copious Ct
tations from dissenting opinions c
:, Justices Harlan and Brown, in the cas-
of Pollock VS.. Farmers Loan and Trus
:. Company. that parts of a statute ma
: be invalid, without rendering invali
) the statute as a whole
: we 10 not QueSllon CuS rune eAu
/ announced, but we beg to add to
the language of the supreme court, i
t 1853 q. S. Reports, that where it
impossible to. extract the unconstitu
: tional, invalid and void provisions c
: the law from the body OF it, withou
invalidating the remainder and de
stroying the law as understood and il
tended by the legislature the la
being void in one particular, is alto
, gether void, and the injunction aske
for should be granted.