The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1879-01-06
The Poor Man Taxed Out of House and
Home.

Follow wing up the discussion on double tax
alton, writer in the Contributors Club of the
January Atlantic ssys-For the benefit Of
those who think that Mr.. Brooks Adams's arti-
Gle 10 the Move nj Der Atlantic, on oppressive
tax alton Of the poor, exaggerates or DISC
the truth, wish to present PLAIN statement
of actual occurrences 10 corroboraton of his
assertions. 1t is the experience of friend CT
mire, lsboring n an, living in the subarbs of
Boston, and may perhaps throw some light on
the causes of the revolt against our admins
tratiye system and the discomfort so widely
felt at the prevailing character of our financial
Legislation for many years past. Desperate
diseases are felt to demand desperate remed dies,
and mea rush wildly into any movement that
promises, how. Yer falsely, relief from buideDs
that are crushing out their lives. give the
account 10 the sufferers own language:
81 had $1,000 in god left me by legacy mai
years age. Before the war lent it; it was re-
paid to me in paper, 10 virtue of the lega!-ten-
der acts aud decisions. 10 1870, full of the idea
so enthusiastically preached, that it was an
immense advantage to nottingham to own
his own house, L bought one which had bren
built several years; the price W as $500, and
paid $1,000 down, and gave mortgage for $4,000,
more, spending d considerable sum ia i'm
Dr0v-ments Ii was ass- ssed at $4,000, and the
taxes were S12 on thousand. The iuterts 81 on
the mortgage was q per cent. the mortgages
being taxed for it, and charging me 81 per cent.
extra TO make up for the tax, which therefore
came out of me instead of them. Last year
thu assessment bad been raised TO S5000 and
the taxes were $3.50 per Thousand, making
$92 80 of direct tax, nttsad of S43 90 as at frst
more thsa double l pal 1925 for interest,
of which S75 was due TO the mortgage tax;
81 30 per year tor Insurance; and allowing j
per cent for repairs, or $75 move, 1 was paving
exactly $500 year for house dear at $500,
besides an lndeterminate bat considerable
sum for public proVementI. [ had Just
$500 OF my own and paid taxes on $4,000. /
could Tot endure it and turned tba whole prop
erty over to the mortgages, sacrificing all
had put in; SO that the financial Legislation of
the State aud na.ion and municipal extrava-
gance had robbed me of all the money had in
10 the world L Immediately rented
the house of the mortgages at 5000 year,
half of what i had been paying and
they will only have to pay taxes on $4,000,
while so long as had it paid on $4,000. so
much for the advantage OF wOrkingman own
ing his own house, and so much for the equity
of the system of taxation in this Comm
wealth. was taxed on the money invested
10 the property, on the money borrowed to
make up the residuary value of the property,
and on that same residuary value over again !;
while as soon as the men borro wed the money
from took it away from me, the latter amount
was not taxed at all. The simple act of trans.
ferriDg the title to another party seems to have
reduced its value $4,000; and can't see any
reason tor il. There is just IS much of it now
as ever, end it is capable of furnishing just as
much revenue, yet it has to pay but little more
than half as much. What equity is there in
taxing man not only on all the property he
uses, but on all the money he has to borrow to
retain the use of it? If | had not put 10 ana
money, and mortgaged it for the whole value,
should have been taxed on $4,000 So il
seems the value Of property rises in inverse
proportion to the amount of ready money the
man has that buys it, and the rich man who
pays cash is only taxed half as much as the
poor man who has none. IF this is not legis-
tating for the rich against the poor, what is ?
In plain words had to pay $75 year as
penalty for the crime of having ouly $4,000
instead of $50O0.''