Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1891-03-24

lana and Oeoensbus9 Hallfoeo ComPanv,
=" Evidently, whoever wrote i wAs famit-
lar With bonds. probably deals IN bonds.
probably has bonds ard probably know
hat bonds are worth scd what they cst.
It shove Familiarity with tbs bond market
which presume no member u this Senate
can exhibit IL he tsiss. Il goes on '.fhsrs
ID quite Q class Of inves.ofs. having 70
active baainess for the use Of capital. Who
Can Ind no other employment for their
means than 70 put u into interest bearing
sacurities." They may not be- competent
to manage II. and then be goes ON TO repeas
these 'widov, orphsn, estate and trustee
subj acts. Notice the language. There u
qui,e CHASE Of investors.
Now what are w here for? Are We TO
legislate in the interest Of class OF inves.-
ors? Are We to make law which shall
enable . class Of investors 70 invest In
Lewiston. Kansas City bonds etc. :? II that
the business Of this Senate and Legislature!
have always thought there was no matter
better settled than that class legislation
could mot be made and that 1t was uncon.
stitutionsl to make IL. Still, this article
asks us to legislAts for = class OF people,
and for class who have retired with their
money, and placed It ia lords. live were
to leSislate for class, should this be the
cla.s2 II We are to legislste for class
should it not be for . class that require
| State aid? There 10 . large class 10 the
State who are sufferers from small income
| from their farms.
think it is admittedly true that the
farming country, except perhaps the new
lands OF Aroos.ook couuty, have deprecia-
ted in value from % TO 40 per cent. In
addition to that depre citation the real estate
OF this State Is bearing the burden Of
| tax alton
This urges that the property which the
statute says shall be taxed, 10 not taxed,
and that IL 1t 10 tsxsd it 10 .'intriQsicslly
uncomfortable" What class OF property 10
itf When they 90 into . workshop and
tax wagon worth $50 for municipal put
poses nobody complains, but when they 60
into the house Of . retired merchant ard
place tax on his piano for half what II 10
worth, II IL "intrinsically uncomfortable" or
when they 60 into the house OF one Of
these merchants who sits in his id'eness
| clipping coupons, and ask him to
show his bonds. 1t 10 'siotrin sically unen-
durable. This article Gays further that
this proposed Law will not b. e6ectuai, thai
come will remove from the State. Il
would not hurt the State any, il some did
Bat where would they go? Will they 90
more stringent law than was ever proposed
here
Mr.. Svanton Of Sasdshoc not exc
cuted. Mr.. Spear-Yes. 1t 10 executed.
In Vermont the Law 10 more stringent
The Massachusetts, law reads: Before
proceeding to make assessment, the assss-
sor shall give reasonable notice to bring in
| their LETS" etc., and the asses
sors shall in all cases require the person
bringing in the list to make oath that the
same IL true which oath may be admins.
tered by either OF the sssessors."
| II he goes to Massachusetts he will mud
- stringent q Law there. This Law will
accomplish one Of three things. Il will
get his property for taxssiou; il will com
pei him to commit perjury. or il will drive
his money ont Of the State. II it drives
bis money ont Of the State 1t won't hurt us
and will put him to some trouble. In rela-
ton to the argument that II 10 "A induce
ment to perjury; why, every criminal Law
upen the sta ute book 10 an inducement to .
man to commit perjury. Why should you
take more interest In tex dodasr than .
horse thief, Who commute perjury. The
zane writer continues Dean swift, more
than century ago described revenue laws
that we're offensive to those Affected by
them ~ "cobwebs that will catch fmsli
fies but allow wasps and hornets to break
through
/ The laws Of Maine we're onensive 10
the writer. II the laws are offensive, Why
do ycu not repeal them and enact laws tn It
are no. offensive. Supposed law was 81
proseet the weak sgaiost the strong. ard
not to oppress the wsak for the benefit Of
tse strong. SIT 10 maxim that that Law
which will protect the poor 10 good enough
for the rich" and Ii 10 pretty good law
for Nc TO abide by. think 1t 10 better than
the one proposed BY this snony NOUS docu-
ment think nfseen states have this Law
which requires man to make IN inventory
Of their personal property, nineteen states.
am informed; but il 10 argued that the
states in which this las exisis do not keep
their valuation Of personal property up.
that when the Law 10 6fst enacted personal
property comes up and then falls back to
its former position. have =
communication from the deputy sec
fetasy Of statt Of Vermont, statement
Of the personal property in Vermont from
| 1880 10 1889, the system was putin practice
DOM to the present time. In 1880 the
personal property in Vermont vas ei5 $40 :
ls2. This Law vas put IN practice in 1881.
aud the pefsousl property rose TO s4s, 1876. :
s67. in 1882. e46. 2is sos; 1888. e4s, $50. .
$40; 1885. e4s, 9l2, ga; 1887, $50 O00. coo
1883, e499. 0C0 900; 1889. 4l91, CSC COO !;
Tin 1890 $3.50 7ss.01 There 10 NO rea.on
70 doubt similar result II this Law j, sr-
piled IN Maine. The sfgumert from srai-
ogy 10 in favor Of shis bill. Ia New York
persona, properly hes been diminishinx in
stsad Of Increasing this very winter; and
there il nov . law for this letting syst. "a
pending before the Legislature. The la~
has proved . success, and we have the tes
/ timony Of the sssess3ss Of these states
thst II 10 better than the cid la-.
In New Hampshire II q man fails r.
make bis liss or mskes m untrue Hs the
sssessofs shall ascesisin - bess they can
The smoant Of his pfogersy and then multi
ply Is By four. Thsre Il no pehai.y ia Yer
mont Penalties will, Ne know, som siiuss
destfoy the eject Of Law. submit tas.
nsdef The Law Of this State, - IL is nov,
from experience which has been derived
from these other states. that there IL no
question to thu mind Of fair man that ths
| peoposed law is god Law
wish 10 discuss what the Lesislssufe
meant phen IL said 70 these commlssioness
thas they shosld provide for ths equAiix-
Asion snd sdjast1snt Of taxation. Did il
mean that " shsuA put more sx upon
raiirosd, s<iegssphs, expftss conpanies md
sasiaes banks?
Il cosd not hsvs meant thas h<csrse
fuch . tax does NOT relieve The muuicipeIi.
sies. postion Of ths tax goes back difecsly