The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1907-11-19
OPINION OF THE COURT BY
WILDER. J.

This is a reserved question from the
First Circuit Court to determine whether
under Sec. 1923 of the Revised Laws
defendant s interest as lessor IN
piece of land is exempt from taxation
when the land is in actual use by the
lessee for the production of plneapples.
This section as originally passed was
Act 80 of the Session Laws of 19O3,
being entitled Gan Act to encourage
diversified industries, and reading as
follows:
sfFor the next five years all prop
erty, real and personal, actually IN use
for the production of pine
apples shall be exempt from
taxation of any kind.
The proposition that exemptions from
taxation are strictly construed, IN other
words. that taxation is the rule and
exemption the exception, is well set
tied. Bishop VS.. Gulick, Haw. 627,
$50; O. r. & L. Co. VS.. Shaw, II Haw.
76. As the United States Supreme
Court puts it, ga doubt is fatal TO
the claim of exemption. Theological
Seminary VS.. Illinois, 1eS q. s. 662, 642.
The question here is not what the Leg
islature could do but what 1t did do
that is, it is question of construction
This statute should be construed IN
connection with the system of tax laws
in existence at the time Of its passage
In Halstead VS.. Pratt, IA Haw. 3S, 80,
it is said that "The general rule is
that a statute should be construed with
reference to the system of laws of
which it is a part unless contrary
intention clearly appears. If this were
not so. statutes would often have to be
given absurd constructions, for they
often do not contain express provisions
as to the extent of their operation IN
this respect
The general system of taxation then
in existence is set out in Chapter SO
of the Revised Laws. A specific amount
is payable by certain male inhabitants
known as poll, school and road taxes.
Carriages, bicycles and dogs are taxed
certain amount which is payable by
the owners thereof. Sec. 12l2 r. l..
reads that, Except as otherwise pro-
yided all real property and all per-
sonal property within the Territory
shall be subject to an annual tax of
one per cent upon the full cash value
of the same. - The meanings of real
property and of personal property for
purposes of taxation are set out. Under
Sec. 1915 r. L. it is provided that :" All
real and personal property and the in
terest of any person in any real or per-
sonal property shall be assessed sep
arately as to each item thereof for its
full cash value" and in Sec. 1917 r. l..
that 1.-The interest of every person in
any property shall be separately as
sessed and every person shall
be liable to taxation in respect of the
full value of his interest in such prop
erty." Certain exemptions as to prop
erty anu persons are allowed. In
dividuals, corporations and companies
are required to make returns of prop
erty owned by them or in their pos
session and assessments are made to or
against them for their interests in prop
erty, and in the case of persons I'M
known or nonresident they are assess
ed as such. There are provisions for
appeals from assessments and for the
collection of taxes. The system as a
whole in theory and in practice, so
far as real property is concerned, is
to tax persons for their interests in
such property. 1t is very common to
speak of assessing and taxing prop
erty, but under our system such an ex-
preston is not exact. For instance, in
Holt VS.. Savidge, Il Haw 81, and in
Long VS.. Holt, IL Haw. 1913, this court
held that the assessment should be made |
to some one whose duty it was to
pay the taxes.
To hold that this 1903 statute ex-
empted a lessor from taxation on his |
interest in land used by the lessee |
for the production of pineapples would |
be an implied repeal of the then ex-
listing laws as to assessing and taxing |
the separate interests of persons in such |
which under Sec. q R. i. |
only follows "when the new law con-
tains provisions contrary to, or ire
concilable with, those of the former
law
There is no doubt but that one of
the purposes of the exemption was to
stimulate, encourage and promote the
production of pineapples. The actual
user Of property for that purpose is
directly benefited by having no taxes
TO pay on his interest therein That
the production of pineappIes is not di-
rectly encouraged by exempting a lessor
from paying taxes on his interest in
land so used, who, from all that ap-
pears, gets as much rent as If the |
was used for some other pur-
pose, is substantially the line of rea-
Soning in State VS.. Macgurn, 1S7 Mo.
239, holding that lessor s interest in
land leased to the public for school
purposes Is not exempt although the
constitution exempted lots used exclu-
sively for schools. See also County of
VS.. Bell, 43 MINI. 344, and