Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1884-02-15

ties were and still are, except in the case
of mortgages given for the purchase money
of the land upon which they operated.
By an act passed in that year, debts secur-
ed by mortgages upon real estate were ex-
empted from taxation and have remained
50 ever since
Those who oppose the reinstatement OF
the tax upon mortgages base their oppos-
ition upon two propositions: The first,t
sweeping one that debts secured by mort
gage are not property, but oely evidences
of debt, and, therefore. not subject to tax
alton; the second is that, if such a tax
were imposed, the mertgagor would be
compelled to pay it, or else no loans could
be secured in this way, and that all exist
ing mortgages would be foreclosed to the
great detriment of the debtor class. Either
of these reasons, if properly sustained,
would seem to be conclusive of the ques-
ton.
The weight OF the argument which has
been advanced in the recent discussion OF
the subject has been direc ed TO the first
proposition, that mortgages are not pro-
perty. All OF the reasoning upon this pro-
position has seemed to US to be essentially
defective. Personal property is divided
by the writers upon the law into two class
es Chooses in possession" or such chat
tells as the owner has the actual use and
enjoyment OF, and chooses in action" or
such property as he owns without having
the actual use and enjoyment thereof, such
ownership being evidenced by contracts
No distinction is taken by any of the le-
gal authorities between chooses in posses
sion and chooses in action, having the least
tendency to admit the proposition that the
latter are not property, or are in any de-
gree an inferior class OF property to the
former. Sir Wm. Blackstone, at page 900
of the second volume OF the commentaries
thus defines the two classes: Properly 10
chattels personal may be either in poses
sion. which is where man hath not only
the right to enjoy but has the actual en-
joyment of the thing or else it is in action
when man hath only bare right with
out any actual enjoyment" Again at
page AGA, the same author says: I'm case
of a sale, when the price is not paid in
ready money, the vendee becomes indebted
to the vendor for the sum agreed on and
the vendor has a property in this price as a
chose in action, by meanes of this contract
of debt" The judicial decisions in
Maryland and elsewhere have also repeat
eddy recognized and enunciated the same
principle as to chooses in action being pro-
perty.
So much for the proposition that debts
secured 10y mortgages and other con-
tracts are included within the term
property" as known TO the law. The
merest examination will also show that
they are property in every sense OF the
word. Suppose A has $4,000 in gold
coin, no one would contend that he had
not that amo unt of property. Let US sup
pose that he loans that amount to% B who
desires to enter into speculation with it
and A, in order 10 secure the payment Ct
the loan and the interest, requires B to
give him a mortgage upon farm B owns
Will any body contend that by that trans
action A has become Invested Of his $l0,.
900 worth of property Is he not quite
as rich q man as he was before, and richer
because his money which before was un.
productive is now realizing him hand
some incomea His improbable chose il
pos ,ession has been converted into pro.
fitable chose in action. Suppose B fails
to pay the loan at maturity, would not A
invoke the power of the courts and thu
government to repossess him Of his pro
perty with the mesne profits Can ht
therefore, claim by any just reasons, to bt
exempt from contributing to the support
of the Government, because he has put hi'
property in this shape any more Than i
he had invested it in cattle or sheep or il
merchandise or had taken a promissory
note as security9 If he had taken promis
sorry note ofB for this loan with personal Sc
curity, be would under existing law be tax
ed for his'property but because he took {
better security in the shape of loan upor
land, LIE, forsootb, must be exempt from al
taxation. The Day attempted to put th'
question to the retuctio ad absurdum ~ in
stancing the case Of a mortgage given up
ON land to secure the purchase money o
such land. This is an exceptional case
and was specially exempted before the &C
of 1870 went into force. In this single in
stance the argument OF "double tax
applies, but proper exception could, 0
course, be made in this case,
The argument against The proposition
to reinstate the tax upon mortgages woulC
seem therefore to rest solely upon the q ues
ton as to whether the same stringency o
the money market which existed in 1871
and was adjudged to be justification TO
the exemption of this class of securitie
from taxation, still continues to exist t.
such an extent az to warrant the continued
exemption of such property. Upon thi
question we give the views of Tax Com
missioner Woolford in his recent repor
which seem to US to be sound:
"At the time Of the passage of the Act O
1870, landowners in Maryland were suferin!
from the terrible effects of the civil war, i'm
mense debt OF the United States was seeking
in vestment at six per cent interest free of tax
alton a variety of railroad bonds and oihe
coupon bonds promising six, seven and eigh
Der cent interest were offered freely, and othe
I investments we're constantly on the market t.
] such an extent that the owners Of real proper