Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1905-01-10

hS 10 tne value Oh SuCn COnlTuClS.
the Supreme Court has further given
opinion In Is Hawn., page SO, that such
contracts terminable at will or for a
period Of not more than one year have
of themselves no cash value.
The decision further reads, Moth.
ing could be realized upon an attempt
ed sale of a privilege to act as agent.
which privilege, carries with 1t no as.
surance of its continuance for a def.
mite length of time.
The evidence shows that the agent
holding contracts with the sugar com.
panles, invariably either themselves.
or with their employees, officers and
friends, hold a majority control OF the
stock Of the sugar company, and the
contracts are unquestionably of value
TO the agents holding them.
Those contracts containing provi
sions such that they can be terminal.
ed at years notice, from either par
ty, are to a large degree perpetual
contracts, for those interested are Of.
flcers, directors and stockholders In
both companies to the agreement, and
therefore so interviewer with one an.
other that II would be almost impos.
sible to dispose with the contract
alone. without n transfer of the con.
troll Of the stock.
1T is difficult to imagine one OF
these agency contracts, standing by
itself, where the agency holding the
contract has no direct interest in the
plantation, nor has any agents own
stockholders or friends any direct in.
terest In said plantation. In which case
the oentra! OF the plantation would be
In the hands of rivals Of or opponents
to the agent holding the contract.
1T is further difficult to imagine
that an agency contract under condi.
tions above outlined has much market
value, II any.
"The Supreme Court decision In Is
Haw., page A. reads: The value at
which property is to be assessed up.
der the tax law is the value for the
purposes Of sale, and not the value to
the owner.
mo legislative enactment prescribes
a mode of estimating the value OF
these contracts.
"The revenue In the form of com
missions from these contracts might
form basis for establishing a value
II the contracts could be brought I'M
der the head of an enterprise for prof
IT.; but this too has been excluded By
the Supreme Court decision above 70
ferred to.
9Th evidence shows that these ageu
cy contracts. by themselves, have nev
er been bought or sold In this market;
therefore no previous sales OF con
tracts can be used for establishing
values.
"Messrs. Brewer & Co. and Messrs
II. Hackfeld & Co. have indeed re
turned certain of these contracts ut {
valuation, but other agencies making
sworn returns, have assigned no cash
value to the same class of contracts
"The return Of one contract, ant
particularly where such contract wal
coupled with control OF plantation
stock, could not serve to fix the valu,
OF the naked contract, stripped of con
troll of stock and incidental advantag,
In the case Of some other agency.
This court cannot find any basi,
for determining cash value on thes,
contracts, within the meaning and in
tent OF the law. either from the evi
dence as given. or from the laws en-
acted by our Legislature.
"The court therefore sustains tn,
, appellants"
THEO. +. LANSING.
!, J. +. BROWN.
|. J. II. GAIT.