Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1874-11-18

prOllt. The trust companies borrow money
1t six per cent and loan it at a profit of two
OF three per cent, and why not tax that
money. The profit goes into the pockets
Of thos" who have money to purchase the
stock of these companies. AMI there is no
:el-on why we should not Tux it Thi>
bill proposes to make the tax one htlf of
one per cent. while the other states tx
the deposits three fourths Of one per cent.
ana will not drive it back where it came
from.
Mr.. Dutton. Of Norwich. asked if it j.
the design to make this tax of one-half of
one per cent in lieu of all other taxes? to
which Mr.. Iynde replied that it is JUS;
that exactly. He was then opposed to the
bill. as it would take money out of he
grand list Of the towns, and So out of To-
cal taxation.
Mr.Gront. Of Barton. said that point
has best illustrated BY the bank Of Brtttl,.-
boro which has Sl,2J0.00O deposited, and
ahont Sl.UU0,O0D escapes taxation. BY
this bill the whole amount will b. reached
and be required to pay tax to the state
treasury. and thus be distributed among
the towns of the state by decreasing tn
aggregate taxes of the whole.
Mr.. Bailey. of Flirlaven. took substrn-
tally the same views of the ease ;tS Mr.
Grout. and urgently favored the pass Igc
of the bill.
The biIl was further briefly discussed
by Mr.. Cook. of Mcnlon Mr Lvnd.. of
Marlboro. and Mr IIubb tr,l of Spring
field
Without rcarhing a vote, the House
adjourned. In the afternoon The bill again
came up.
Mr. Lald, Of .Alburgn. sail he could al
most wish that this bill would pas, ~ hi
property. whatever he had. WIS rot in land
bat such Il that he could easily convert /,
into savings bank securities and thus hlve
it bear but 4 light proportion Of taxes
BY this bill. th- man who had 5000 de
posted in 4 savings bank pays 50 t,xe-
and that covers all the tax We can levy
upon that money. But pat that mon-y
into the li>t as now provided by law, and
The vlriou> taxes would amount to So
for this yt.ir. Ii would be for the b.nrt
Of those who lave money to lrnI IL,
could see evils in the bill, and if it pissed
it must do 80 without his vote Il h. i OPP
posed t. il. He moved that the biIl b,
dismissed.
Mr.. Elod@ett. Of >t. Johnebury. slil Ia,
would favor the bill if mtde TO apply e
'lrpo>lor> from without the state He had
hat experience in savings banks. and
ihou-ht We should not ch tn-e the ltw in
regard 10 our home depo~itor~. who were
N the main 4 class ot poorer drro-ijor-.
that >hn.ll be encouraged and not di>-
cOuraTeI 10 save thcir earnings for de-
po>it.
Mr, LYME. Of Marlboro, ~:iI we had
Il decision of tn. supreme coart that NIL
prevent our doing wl1t the gentleman
from St. J"hn>burv prupo>ei-taX non
resident depo~itor> when We do n"t tax
resident jepo>jt"r~. In reply 10 Mr.. I-;,id
he would >ay that the deposits are no
taxed now. and they WuUld be- under thi-
bill
Mr., Davenport. ot Wilmington. ~lid il
i The aim Of almo>, :,il our monrv,d men
10 keep their money ont of the grand list
and in order to do % they viii divide thcii
money up among their families. setting t"
each member so. and depo>iting til,
same in The several banks in the state. and
thus getting interest on all the money they
have. without any tINatIon H. wl~
opposed I" this way of cheating til" STATE
out Of the taxes Oh property. There are
savings banks enough IN this state To- ena-
bic a very wealthy man 10 keep his money
ont of the list and Vet get the benefit oi
his deposits. He preferred the plan IL
proposed in this hil!-tp have all deposits
pay tax directly into the treasury. and
thereby relieve the general burden If tax
alton. 1t j true il does not % II tn
credit of any particular town or villt@r.
but il helps reduce the aggregate amount
of taxation. and thus dimni>heS tn, pro
portion IL be borne by each town.
Mr.. Gilman of Montpelier. thought the
members Of this House hardly wanted
this bin to pas. 1t Is true il sweeps int
the treasury of the state a tax of on"-h III
Of one per cent. bat at the same time it
takes that money ont of the local taxation
of the towns. villages and counties. which
should not be done. He did not believe
the p"ollr of the state wanted any such
bin. and H. hoped it would be dismissed.
Nh Bailey. of Firhslvcn. said that tn.
provision for local taxation i Just the
trouble with the present law. |. i cvadcd
in various WAYS and the result i> that il
i KEEP; ont of III, local lists an thus e.
cape> taxation. There is 4 rcmi>>ne>>.
also. on the part of the bank officials who
do not want 10 help the state to secure the
taxes from dcpo>itor>, bat will rather help
dcpo>itorS 10 escape taxation.
Mr.. Wells. of CRANKY, aid that this de
bate has developed the fact that the deposits
in savings banks escape taxation now but
he did not see how this bill is coin" t.
remedy the evil If We will amend the
bill 80 IL to make is provisions reach 4
class of deposits not now reached by law.
he would favor it. As it now stands he
must vote to dismiss the bill.
- i
to him that those who oppose these bill are
penny wise and pound foolish" If they
VIII examine the facts. we shall find that
they have an eve on a class of the deposits
that i now reached for local taxation and
will. irving to save the small amount that
gets into local taxes. We lose sight of the
large amount that now escapes all taxes
The large towns naturally oppose this bill.
* il tlke> something ont OF the lists of
those towns; but those towns can afford To
fore~, the small amount they would be
benefited under the present law, for The
sake of the larger public good. and the
larger amount of taxes that Will be paid
into lhr state treasury.
Mr. Blodgetl. of st. .Julln>burv. SAID it
appeared thtt the proposition he submitted
i> not prtcticahle; So he would favor the
next best thing. He thought this bill
would reach II larger amount OF deposits
than is now reached for taxation, and he
>houll favor is passage He hoped the
House would refuse to dismiss
Mr.. Tyler, Of Ira~burgh. demanded the
previous question. which WAS seconded bv
the House, and the question being shall
the bill be dismissed? Mr.. Lvnde, of Marl-
boro. demanded the yeas and nays, which
were taken Ayes, II; nays, ll9. 50 the
bill was not dismissed.
The question then recuIred on the adop-
ton of the amendments proposed by the
committee, which were agreed to-in-
cluling trust companies with savings
banks, fixing the tax ut one-half of one
per cent per annum, one-half on the
average amount of deposits for six months