The Portland daily press., 1893-03-17

| tile taxes pa1Q III Bangor 3l4 per C6ub
were on personal property or, with the
tax on railraad bonds returned to the
city by the state. 414 per cent or more
| than was claimed for such a bill by the
| tax commission What would be the
class of estates hit by this bill? Senator
| Thatcher knew of cases where poor
widows were struggling to support chill
| dren on a bare pittance. Take the Sc
of such an one with say $4,000 invested
| at 5 per cent 1t was unwiSe to bring
| such property to light for Under this bill
in the city of Bangor the widow would
pay p per cent in taxes or in other words
she would have less than $500 left of her
income. But how about the rich
| man who wanted to dodge
his taxes? he knew how to pack
his little bag just before the first of
| April and go to Boston OF New York for
a month or two. Mr.. Thatcher mem
toned the case of a wealthy gentleman
who said that he had not long to live, if
| this law passed he would divide his
| in other Estates. He knew of case of q
man of large means who had come to
Maine to live. under an agreement with
the authorities of the town in which he
| settled that he should pay $4,000 in taxes
not that he should be taxed on $4,000,
| but that he should pay that sum annu-
| ally. Now pass this bill and you drive
| that man out of the state. These things
may not be right but they show what
| the results of this law would be.
Mr. Thatcher told of the great devel-
opment of the manufacturing interests
of the state in the past two years. He
mentioned the new Aroostook road, the
pulp factories which were becoming as
thick as stars along the rivers. Ii not
unduly oppressed by taxation these in
the state. The Senator from Somerset
had said that this law worked we'll in
other states. From the report Of the
secretary of the New Hampshire board
of equalization and from newspaper ar
ticles on the operations Of the law in
Vermont and Illinois, Mr.. Thatcher
read extracts which told decidedly diff
ferent story. 1t appeared from these ex-
tracts that purjury fourished and peo-
pie moved away from these states.
Finally, Mr.. Thatcher said that he op-
posed the bill because he believed it to
be unconstitutional. The constitution
provides that all property should bear
it's fair share of taxation. 1t did not, he
believed, warrant the addition of 25 per
cent to it's value. The Senate was con-
SIu6FlnS tu0 QuoSUlOu OI LdAcS3
not establishing punishments.
Senator Allen of Washington opposed
the bill because he believed it would be
hardship upon poor farmers who now
paid taxes on the full value of their real
estate and who, under this law, would
have to pay in addition taxes upon the
few hundred dollars laid byfor a rainy
day.
Senator Wiggin supported the bill. He
believed that the man who paid the taxes
was the one who should make known
what he was worth. He did not believe
that this state was filled with men who
would become liars and perjurers if this
bill passed. The argument that people
would leave the state in consequence of
it reminded him of the old couplet:
.Patriots we for be it understood,
We leave our country for our country'S good"
Let them go. It was said that people
would not come to Maine. Let them
stay out and the population of the state
remain where it is if the people who till
the hills and valleys of Maine must bear
their burdens for them. Senator Wiggin
spoke of the demand for the bill. He
objected to the term common people
used by Senator Winslow because in that
case the others would have to be called
uncommon people. He believed. how
ever, that the term was used with the
best of intentions.
Senator Grindle said that he had now
found the great reason urged for the
passage of this bill. 1T was because
good many people wanted it. 1t was not
to be question of whether the bill
would give them what they wanted or
whether it would fail of it's purposes.
AS to oaths, DIR. Grindle said that the
value of the oath came largely from the
importance and the rarity of the occa-
sions on which it was used. Make it of
frequent occurrence and it would soon
lose its Importance.
Senator Hersey thought that the men
with the gripsacks could pack their souls
up with their bonds and depart. AS to
widows and orphans, they were taken
care Of by the savings banks, although
in his section, widows with $4,000 were
not called poor and were in great de-
mand.
The vote then came on Senator Grin
dies motion to indefinitely postpone,
which was defeated IA to IA, President
Spear voting against it to make a tie.
Those who voted to indefinitely postpone
OF against the bill, we're:
Senators Allan Clark, Coffin, Grindle, Har-
per, Hersom, Holman, Mallet Mayo, Nick.
erson, Seiders, Spofford, Thatcher, Waterhouse-
Those who voted against postpone
ment or for the bill were:
Senators Deering, Herrck Hersey. Hill,
Jackson, Libby Lyons Peakes. Shay, Spear,
Swanton, Wiggfn, Winslow, Wood.
Mr.. Cook, who would have voted no
was paired with Mr.. Ames who was alb
sent and would have voted yes. Mr..
Bradford was absent.
Immediately after the announcement
of the vote, the Senate adjourned.
When the Senate reconvened at 2.30,
there was some sparring as to whether
the bill should be taken up then or to-
morrow, the friends of the bill favoring
postponement They carried their point
by vote of II to 10, so the matter will
come up again tom orrow. Unless the
friends of the bill between now and then
can make one or moro converts, it is
dead.
Those in position to know say tonight
that there is likely to be change in the