The Portland daily press., 1895-02-08
THE LEGISLATURE.


Mr. dlluert Oh CdutOH. CdllGu 1Ho AiA"tsS~'
up. He mentioned that the people of orono
did not ask for this appropriation for the
college in their midst. If the college was
worthy it would seem that the legislature
might be relied upon to treat it fairly with
out the presence of the faculty OF a portion
of it buttonholing the members in the
Hobbies.
Mr.. Gilbert of Green. was the next de-
bator. He is Il member of the State college
committee. ana rehearsed the history of the
legislation, the introduction of the original
measure laying a special state tax on the
Institution and its re-casting by direction
of the House into the pending resolve. Mr..
Gilbert strongly urged the passage of the
bill.
Mr.. Barrett of Canaan. spoke in opposition
to the bill. He said: We know something
about this institution. We know that an
attempt has been made to improve it. They
have added to it until it has outgrown the
purpose for which it was founded. would
like toask the committee Why they had per-
mitted the adding of departments until this
institution has outgrown its purposes. We
can't talk economy here because it is not
popular here. have lived here SO long that
l am myself disposed to be liberal. Down
here gentlemen you talk of the millions and
hundreds of thousands, but back in the old
district from which came they reckon by
dollars and cents.
Mr.. Gilbert of Green said that only one
department had been added to the college
and that was for the study of electrical
engineering, which was certainly in the
province of the institution.
Mr.. HolbIook of Brunswick. spoke of the
usefulness ana high standing of the college.
but was not prepared to support SO large an
appropriation al this time.
Mr.. Plummer of Dexter and Mr. Haines of
WateIville. spoke in favor of the bill.
The House was practically unanimous in
the passage OF the bill, only eight members
voting in favor of reducing the amoun. of
the appropriation. The bill was passed to
be engrossed. e,
COLLATERAL INHERITANCE AGAIN. !
The collateral inheritance tax law is get
ting good deal of attention these days.
This morning Senator Savage put In bill
making several amendme nts to the act. The
first strikes out the first section of the act
and subsritutesrfor it the following:
whichever the whole or any part of de-
ceased PERSONS estate, including all
property within the jurisdiction OF this
state. and any interest therein. whether be-
longing to inhabitants of this state or not,
and whether tangible OF intangible, which
shall pass collaterally. by will Or by inter-
state laws Of this state. or by deeed. grants,
sale or gift made OF intended to take effect
in possession or enjoyment after the death
of the grantor. the whole or such part shall
1..% ox 1l h. e%rx,
per cent of its value above $1,000. for the
use of the state, and all administrators. ex-
ecutors and trustees. and any sucS grant
under conveyance made during the
grantor's life. shall be liable for all such
taxes, with lawful interest as hereinafter
provided until the same shall have been
paid as hereinafter directed. An estate
passes or descends collateralIy when it
passes or descends to any person in trust or
otherwise, other than to or for the use OF
the father, mother, husband, wife, lineal
descendants, adopted child, the lineal de-
scendant of any adopted child, the wife or
widow of a son or the husband of a daughter
of descendant"
The section changes the present law by
making the tax fall on the whole amount of
an estate hequeathed collaterally above
$1,000 instead of upon individual collateral
requests over $500 as now. Now if man
dies and leaves to three institutions $500
each, no tax is paid none of the requests
being over the sum now exempted. The
amendment would assess the tax on $500.
less the $1,000 exempted. OF on $500. the
amount of the tax being deducted in equal
shares from the three requests. 1t will be
seen that in cases where number of small
requests are made they would be taxed ny
the bill where they now escape. The
amount of the property exempted is made
$1,000 instead of $500 as explained above and
the rate of the tax is increased from la to
per cent.
Section 27. the present law. would be
amended by requiring she tax to De paid in
three years instead of within one year as
now. ''or within such further time as the
Judge of probate may decide.''
Section Is is amended SO that the act shall
not apply TO any property bequeathed to
any charitable or benevolent institutions,
co1porated and doing business within the
state.''
The bill has the endorsement of the board
of state assessors.
THE RIGHTS OF MOTHERS.