Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, Transmitted to Congress, With the Annual Message of the President, December 6, 1880
No. 383.
Mr. Comly
to Mr. Evarts.
Honolulu, March 15, 1880. (Received April 1.)
Sir: I have the honor to transmit further correspondence, since last mail day, in relation to the case of Patrick Quinn and other similar cases since brought to my notice. These inclosures complete the exhibits properly belonging to my dispatch No. 91, sent by last mail.
I have, &c.,
Mr. Kapena to Mr. Comly.
Honolulu, February 17, 1880.
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your excellency’s note of yesterday, in which you say that you are not desirous of proceeding further in the case of P. Quinn “without further instructions from the Secretary of State.” Of course I am not desirous of continuing the correspondence any more than your excellency is; hut there is one sentence in your excellency’s letter which I think it worth while to speak of; it is this: You say, “An official of this government has committed an error which might have been avoided by simply asking information from the man himself.” And again, “the tax assessor is bound to know, before he places a name on the list, whether the person assessed is liable. If he place a man on the list who is not subject to a tax, it is he and not the person erroneously taxed who should pay the penalty of the error.” I think it worth while to again remark that Quinn was living on a plantation in Hilo, and that the assessor did ask the manager who of his employe’s was liable to taxation, and left the printed form containing the question to be answered at his leisure, so that the manager had an entire month to inquire of “the hands.” The manager returned in writing the name of Quinn as liable to taxation. Under these circumstances your excellency will see that the manager had every opportunity to ask of Quinn the necessary question as to his liability, and it was the manager, therefore (the employer of Quinn), who is to blame for putting his name on the list, rather than the assessor.
I make these remarks without any desire of prolonging the correspondence, but only because I am always anxious to clear up any misunderstanding and place the matter in a clear light.
I have, &c.,
Mr. Comly to Mr. Kapena.
Honolulu, March 8, 1880.
Sir: I have delayed my reply to your excellency’s note of February 17, in the hope that yesterday’s steamer from Hawaii would give me final information of the receipt by Patrick Quinn of his money and of his satisfaction. So far, however, I have only a notification that the money, $8, has been placed in the hands of Consular-Agent Spencer, subject to call of Patrick Quinn.
[Page 602]I regret to say that in the mean time two other protests have reached me through United States Consul Morton of cases similar in all respects to that of Quinn, except that in these new cases the tax collector himself took the names of the men, they protesting at the time against his illegal action.
Your excellency having taken the pains to repeat to me in your last note the statement that Quinn’s name was given to the assessor by the manager of the plantation where he was employed, and that it was the manager, therefore, and not the assessor, who is to blame, it seems necessary for me also to repeat that the assessor is the only lawful agent of His Majesty’s Government in this business, and if he delegates any part of his duties to a private person having no official relation to the duty and unknown to the law in that connection, the assessor becomes liable for the acts of his agent as fully as if they were his own acts. The person wronged could have no remedy against the manager of the plantation, because he is wholly unknown to the law as an assessor of taxes. Your excellency holds that the assessor is not to blame if he ignorantly accepts the list of which the manager has wronged the person illegally assessed. It would result, therefore, that the assessor has only to employ some agent unknown to the law to place the names of American citizens on the tax-list, and they may be illegally taxed without remedy and nobody to blame. The courtesy of his excellency the minister of finance would in that case be the only recourse to prevent His Majesty’s Government from doing a great wrong to an American citizen.
I cannot help thinking that your excellency will see on reflection that the only safe rule, not only for the protection of the citizens but for the protection of the government itself, is to hold the assessor responsible for the performance of the duty with which the law charges him. The government, it seems to me, should hold the assessor alone responsible for protecting its good name from the charge of injustice in wrongfully taxing persons not liable.
I have no desire, however, to prolong the discussion. I hope all future cases may be settled by an application direct to his excellency the minister of finance, who has so courteously and promptly ordered the money to be refunded in the case of Patrick Quinn.
It remains only for me to give the names of the two cases brought to my notice by Mr. Morton.
John Grace writes to Mr. Morton, inclosing tax-receipts for 1879, signed by J. Mills, Luna Auhau, acknowledging the receipt of $5 each from John Grace and T. Hayes, both employed at Honokaa, Hawaii. Grace states that he arrived in Honolulu, per steamer Australia, September 9, 1879, and did not go to Hawaii for a month later. Hayes arrived at Honolulu from San Francisco, November 4, 1879.
You will observe that both of these men arrived in the country after the date of making up the tax-rolls even, as stated in your excellency’s note. Grace states that there are no less than eight American citizens on this one plantation, Honokaa, that have been forced to pay this tax in the same way, illegally, under threats of imprisonment.
I hope all these cases may be promptly set right without further correspondence, and that such instructions may be issued as will relieve the minister of finance from all further trouble from errors of this sort on the part of assessors.
Renewing the assurances of my highest respect and consideration,
I am, &c.,
Note.—The remaining Inclosures are omitted herefrom.