The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1884-12-17
A Card.

A Card.
| Mr.. Editor'-It is perhaps ungracious to
| criticise o compliment but the credit you
give me in your editorial of the Sd does in
| justice to others. My share in the author
ship of Massachusetts tax bills is not the
corporation tax law, but the law passed in
1862 establishing the present system of tax
ing savings banks--perhaps the first meas
ure OF its kind. Hon. ID. A. Gleason, the
| present state treasurer, was the author of
the corporation tax law. A tax bureau was
| organized in 1884, with him as manager, and
| he gave seventeen years to the suggestion
and administration of tax laws-with what
effect you may judge from examples. Thus
| prior to 1864 corporations were taxed by
local assessors. In that year, without in
ereasing the rate-in fact il / remember
with rate quarter per cent less than the
average-Mr. Gleason collected and paid
over to the towns 100000 more than they
would have got under the former method
and put S675,000 into the state treasury as
| its share besides In 1865 Mr.. Gleason, with
Judge John Wells, drew the bank tax act
Mr.. Gleason also drew the acts OF 1868 and
1871. Under the old system of local assess
ment, bank stockholders would have paid
| SOIL ,654 taxes in 1871 to the towns. Mr..
| Gleason collected for them S946 900 and put
| 1881 600 into the state treasury besides
And this was done without increasing the
rate. But it was too much for the moneyed
| Iueu lHey Tallleu III force IN 1917 ana got
the law repealed, substituting new act
returning to the old system-a law under
which bank stock was supposed to pay as
much as before, but under which it was
taxed on the principles of the politician who
was in favor of the prohibitory law but OPP
| posed to its enforcement. The revenue fell
off half a million. And the next year the
want of this half million was too strong for
the moneyed men and Mr.. GleasOn's law
was restored to stay. Mr.. Gleason drew also
the different acts taxing fire, marine and
| life insurance companies. 1t is safe to as
! sert that the laws which have come from
! his pen, by compelling wealth to pay its
! share, have added fifteen or twenty millions
| to the public revenue from property which
| would otherwise have escaped taxation. 1t
is needless to say that he is sharply opposed
to the present law exempting money-lend-
ers on their mortgage loans. His service
shows the advantages you may expect from
| an able tax commissioner studying your
| system and devoted to the administration
and improvement Of the tax laws. 1t illus
trates another point. Political economists
wonder at the ease with which Massachu-
sets bears the most burdensome taxes in
| the world-paying fifty per cent more per
capita than Great Britain. They wonder
| why il is that in Philadelphia for example,
where real estate bears nearly all the taxes
there is more friction to raise a small sum
per capita than Boston has to raise twice as
much. 1t is because, first, of the broad
basis of taxation, under which everybody
who has had property has been held to pay,
without deduction or offset; second, the
rich have been more strictly taxed here than
elsewhere by just such acts as Mr. Gleason
has drawn. The load which brushes few
is easy when everybody helps to carry it,
Finally, itis not 1 who should be considered
in the apportionment of credit for your cor
poration tax law, but Colonel Hooker of
Brattleboro, Mr.. Wing of Montpelier, and
the other efficient members of the ways and
means committee of 1882. They drew and
perfected the bill, the period of my stay be-
ing given to hearings and to such sugges-
tons as l could give from our Massachusetts
experience. They deserve to be remem-
bered in Vermont. And it is incomprehen-
sible to me how, with full knowledge of the
honor due Colonel Hooker in this matter,
men enough could be rallied against him in
Bratteboro to defeat his return to the post
where he, with his associates had rendered
such brilliant service
Very respectfully,
HENRY VIM
EDITORIAL CoMMENTs.-Major VIM is as
modest and generous as he is skilled and
learned in his speciality. We spoke, in
the article to which he refers of the invalu-
able service which, as counsel to the COM
mittee on ways and means, he rendered in
blocking out the revenue law of 1882. We
gave him scant praise for his services on that
occasion-services which have not been gen
orally recognized, and the high value of
which the gentlemen whom he names have
been foremost in acknowledging. In this
connection we cannot forbear to recount
briefly what we have learned of Mai Winn's
connection with the establishing Of MaSsa-
chusetts present tax system, the more so as
the history Is interesting and instructive in
connection with the consideration of the sub
1ect of taxation itself. In 1862 Mr.. VIM, lust
out ofcollege, became the assistant of the at
nnN nj TOD Al.
There was great need of new sources of
revenue for war purposes. Official returns
showed that four-iifths of the savings bank
deposits were untaxed. The committee in
charge OF revenue questions went to Young
Winn to see if he could devise a remedy
Massachusetts, constitution required that
assessments should be proportional" that
blacksmith should not be charged one
rate, a savings bank depositor another. So
1T was universally supposed that savings
bank depostors could only be taxed by the
local assessors on their property and could
not be taxed uniform rate by the state
But the constitution also provides that ex-
clses may be laid on commodities -
Under this provision chartered banks had
paid on their charters an excise of one per
cent on their chartered capital. Value was
lmmaterial-if the stock was worth So
or $500, the tax was the same. But Mr.
VIM took the ground that the charter of a
savings bank was a commodity; that the con-
stltutlon, in providing for excuses on COM
modlties, gave the power to make the eX-
else reasonable; that it was reasonable
to tax the charter in proportion to its
use; that its use was in proportion to the
deposits II carried. So he drafted q bill
laying on savings banks tax on their fran
chise OF one-half of one per cent on the
average amount of their deposits taken
twice year, averaged for six months and
exempting the depositor entirely. The law
yers told him that was not an excise on
commodity which had no relation to its
value, as an excise should have none, but
really a tax on property and as the savings
bank depositor in given town was taxed
only one-half of one per cent on his prop
erty, while the blacksmith was taxed one
per cent, it was unconstitutional. Winn's
defence was that it was not at all a tax on
the shareholder or depositor; it was a tax
on the banks franchise, and it was inmate
rial that the tax on the bank was one-half
of one per cent on its deposits just as if they
were the property taxed; the property was
only the measure of what the tax should be;
IL was not itself taxed. Mr.. Winn's bill
passed, but just before its passage Caleb
Gushing, to kill the bill, got the words of
the caption and first clause changed, by in
sorting an amendment, too late for an ex-
PLANTATION OF its purpose, changing the ex-
preston every savings bank - shall
pay tax into every savings bank -
shall pay tax on account OF its depos-
itors." Nobody in the house saw that this
was intended TO put the tax on the depositor,
and, If laid on the depositor, was invalid.
WILL