The aegis & intelligencer. [volume] (Bel Air, Md.) 1864-1923, 1878-02-01
Taxation of Mortgages.

We print in another column communica-
ton from "Justce," taking The ground that
mortgages should be taxed Our correspond
ent frankly confesses that such tax is bur-
densome and unfair to the borrower, by COM
pelling him to pay twice on the amount he
borrows, while the lender goes free. He
suggests as remedy that every mortgage
should bear the affidavit of the mortgage
that he has not, directly or indirectly, requr-
ed the mortgagor to pay the taxes thereon
His plan would perhaps be good one if the
mortgage were complied to lend his money
on mortgage. He is not constrained thus to
lend it, but can invest it las he pleases. THE
borrower is servant to the lender" now as he
was in Solomon's day, and must submit to
such conditions as the lender exacts or his
necessities compel him to accept.
If mortgages were taxed and the law made
it penal offensa for the mortgage to COM
pei the borrower to pay the tax, the rate Of
interest for money borrowed on this kind of
security would at once be increased to an
amount sufficient to pay the tax. Thus the
mortgage might pay the tax, but he would
first exact it of the borrower in the shape of
increased interest.
Our correspondent is fully aware of the
fact that the law in this State only authorizes
the exaction of six per cent. interest per an
mum. He knows, also, that only few persons
construe the law strictly or are Conscientious
enough to lend their money at six per cent.
on mortgage. With Baltimore city stock at
premium and paying only from five to six
per cent. interest, we might suppose that cap
italists would rather invest their money on
mortgage, free of tax, ut six per cent. Prac-
tcally, those who have occasion to borrow
money know that this is not so. Money can
not be borrowed in Hartford county on first
class mortgages at six per cent. 1fmortgnges
were taxed the rate of interest would cores
pondingly advance
If mortgages could be taxed without i'm
posing double burden upon the borrower
we should favor their taxation but we regard
it as impractcable.
Besides the above reasons, and also those
so forcibly urged in the recent message OF
Governor Carroll in opposition to she pro-
posed taxation, the question is one that has
been measurably settled by actual experiment
A former Act of Assembly imposing this
tax, was in force up to the year 1870
In every case under its operation the
lender exacted payment of the tax from
the borrower, in addition to interest
and frequently bonus. Can law be passed
that will not be evaded, imposing its pay.
ment upon the lender, no matter with how
many restrictions it is hedged around? The
affidavit suggested by our correspondent We
take it, would no more effect the purpose
than the affidavit already required to mort
cages that the consideration therein men
toned is true and bona fide operates to re-
strain the execution of mortgage for the
added bonus in addition to the sum really
loaned-as is frequently the case. Its practi
cal operation, in all the lights of past and
present experience, would impose double
burden of taxation upon the borrower, to the
exemption of the lender, the richer class, and
thereby make taxation unequal instead OF
equalizing it, and therefore it is that we arc
opposed TO its imposition.