The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1881-04-30
Taxing Mortgages.

A contributor, signing himself "Mort-
gagor," whose communication Is published
this morning, strikes the nail on the head
when he says it is the desire to get at the
rich mans cash box that is the root of the
movement to tax mortgages. That is ex-
actly it; for there is no reason why the
poor man should pay taxes and the rich
man 90 free. The constitution requires
that every man shall contribute to the sup
port of the government according to his
actual worth in real and personal property,
and to our mind It is clear that the mort
gagee should pay taxes on his mortgage
The tax bill which does not require 1t,
does not fulfill the constitutional mandate
A distinguished citizen of this State, who
is writing and talking reform more vigor-
ously than any one else, is reputed to be
worth seven hundred thousand dollars, and
is taxed, we understand, upon only seven
tv-two thousand dollars. This same indi-
vidual, too, is reported TO be opposed to
taxing mortgages. If he is sincere in his
talk about taxation, here is chance for
him to tighten the burden by doing what
the constitution requires-by contributing
to the support Of the government accord
ing to his actual worth in real and person
al property.
There are men is this city and county
who pay very little taxes, yet are worth
many thousands of dollars. 1t is not their
fault, but the fault of the law.
"MortgagOr" argues from practice, aud
does not discuss principle. The mortsagor
now PAYS all costs Of writing and recording
mortgages, aud he believes that if mort
cages are taxed the lenderwill require the
borrower to pay the tax also. From this
"Mortgagorr concludes that it will be to
the detrimeut of the borrower to impose
tax upon mortgages.
II may be true, 10 the event Of mort
cages being taxed, that the mortgage
would like to shift the burden Of taxation
upon the mortgagor, bet such bill as we
would have passed would impose heavy
penalties for all such transactions. II IS
argued by the opponents Of taxing mort
cages that it would be an easy matter to
insert in the mortgage provision that the
mortgagor shall pay all taxes. But whether
that covenant would stand the test Of law
might be debateable question. The con-
stitution requires every man 10 contribute
to the support Of the State government
according to his actual worth in real aud
personal property. That provision of the
fundamental law does not contemplate that
a man shall shirk his duties to the State
BY hook or crook, and it would appear to
US that the courts should not protect any
one in thus trying to evade the law Good
citizens do not endeavor to evade just
laws. or to shirk their responsibilities to
the State.
There is one fact IN money lending that
is generally overlooked, aad that Is that
the borrower confers as much favor by
borrowing as the lender DOES by lending.
Does the capitalist loan money to benefit
his fellow-man or to benefit himself? Most
assuredIy he does It for his own benefit.
When he loans money be wants, and very
properly, most ample security, aud he wants
his intcrcs, promptly. 10 making his con
tract. ssIfinterest is his guide. The bor-
rover, too, is benefited by the loan, bat
he i under no obligations TO the loaner.
He gives him ample security and pays him
a liberal hire for the use Of his money
CAPITAL is Of no use unless it can be EN-
ployed. and be Who employs it confers
favor. @Mortgagor" says that the Dor
rover pays the cost Of recording mortgages,
but as meaey-Iending Is Transaction ma
tually beneficial to leader and borrower,
Justice would require that saeh cost should
Be equally borne BY them.