The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1915-01-15
PRIVATELY OWNED AUTOS
MUST PAY COUNTY TAX
Territorial Treasurer informed He
Has Right to make Owners
Come to Time
tFrom Tharsday Adyertiser.l

al ~ .
In an opinion rendered to the terri
torial treasurer yesterday by the at
torncy general, Mr. stainback holds
chat sin the absence Of actor by con.
gross, the Jurisdiction Of the United
States as distinguished from the Ter
ritory, Is not exclusive upon military
posts in the Territory except so far as
1t may be for its use as military
post, and il cannot be seriously con.
tended that taxation of privately owned
automobiles used for private purposes
will interfere with such use. -
In other words Mr.. StaiBback holds
that automobiles owned by officers,
priyates or any one else living on Il
military reservation and used for priE
vate purposes are liable TO taxation
whether or not those machines are kept
entirely upon the reservations on Janu-
airy D, as Of which date property is
made assessable for the year. So
Disagree With Former 0fhcial ~
Attorney General Stainback g opin.'
ion does not coincide with that given
by former Deputy General Y. Write
sutton, which was approved by former
Attorney General Alexander Lindsay,
Jr. This was Opinion No. 1871, dated
August |, 1910, "relating 20 privately
owned automobiles housed upon mill.
tary and naval reservations in this
Territory, but used upon the streets Of
Honolulu - " VIZ Ri 'yf4s&
In referring il the former .opirs,A
rendered by the department Mr.. STAIN.
back says; t7e's
/" cannot agree with the conclusion
therein expressed that eff the automol
bile Is owned by person residing ON
the military reservation and is kept by
him on such reservation on the first day
of January, the automobile Is not sub
iect TO the taxes imposed by section
1908, but in case the automobile is
kept by the same person without a mil.
itary reservation, on January first, IL
then is subject to the taxes imposed
by this section. - III
? The attorney general quotes statutes
and decision Of courts in several states
and territories which seem to make has
Wow of the question tenable in law
and otherwise. The opinion is a
lengthy one. In concluding h is investi-
CATION Of authorities Mr., stainback
says: s. rra.ta s4I trat rE.5, ~
Territorial Court .rorGble l...o....&
80 Finally, Our own supreme court, in
the case OF the Territory VS.. Carter,
10 Haw. IgS, has decided that the Ter.
ritOry las jurisdiction over the United
States military and naval reservations
in the Territory, for offenses commit.
tod upon such reservations. The de.
eision Is based upon Section 8 of the
Or game Act, containing in force the
laws of Hawaii not Inconsistent with
the laws of the United States. This
ease world seem TO be decisive of the
view that the territorial courts would
take upon this matter, as the Organic
Act (Sec. 5a) provides that the Iegis-
lative power of the Territory shall ex.
tend to all rightful subjects of ieeisla.
ton not inconsistent with the Consti.
tuition and laws Of the United States
locally applicable. f. 'te
Law Points Quoted ~ - AZ
The taxing power is part Of tho
legislative power, and this power is sril
preIue except where limitations are i'm
posed Cooley Taxation, page 1877. In
re Craig, 20 Hawa Haw. 4S3:- III Es I.
4" 'This power was conferred updn
local legislature with all the eomplete.
ness and effectiveness with which that
power is vested in and exercised by the
legislature Of any state t
In re Craig supra, Peacock VS.
Pratt, l2l Fed. 772. 49, .gt. / 80. T
Congress, of course, can make tail
needful rules and regulations respect.
ing the Territory including limitations
upon the taxing power or Jurisdiction
over military reservations but in order
TO exclude territorial jurisdiction somo
act of congress showing such intent is
necessary. No such action has been
taken by congress-, the reservations
having been set aside for military or
j naval purposes by executive orders. {"
w $50 ~ L.. ~.