Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1903-06-05
BRATTLEB0R0 LOCAL.
MUST PAY THE TAX.
Decision Against Odd Fellows Which
May Have Far-Reaching Effect With
FraternaI Examinations.

The question Of eNempting from taxa
ton the brick building near Milestone
bridge known as odd Fellows block,
owned by Wantastiquet lodge of odd
Fellows, came before the board of civil
authority at a public hearing Monday
afternoon. For 10 years the property
has been exempted as being used for
charity. Other property owners have
objected to having ii exempted, and this
year the objection was so strong that the
listers decided to put the property in the
list. The odd Fellows gave in their
schedule under protest and the property
was put down at $500, upon which the
tax was about 1925 AT the hearing Law
Yer James +. Hooker appeared for the
odd Fellows and Col. Kittredge Haskins
for the town. The vote of the board Of
civil authority was a tie, but at later
meeting of the board it was voted not
10 exempt the property.
The result may be far-reaching in Yer
mont If the odd Fellows pay the tax
under protest, as in justice to them
selves they ought TO do, the matter will
be taken to the courts for settlement
once and for all. and the expense would
not be large. In that event the decis-
ions OF the courts would affect all prop
erty owned by fraternal organizations
throughout the state. The odd Fellows
do not object to paying the tax, but they
feel that if they pay there are others
who ought to pay.
Lawyer Hooker objected to having 7.
J. b. Cudworth and j. S. Cutting, mem
bers of the board of civil authority, sit as
members of the board, on the ground
that they We're listers and that il was
from their decision that the appeal was
MADE Col. Haskins objected to II. Ct.
Barber r. c. Bacon and Z. w. Gibson
sitting on the ground that they were
odd Fellows and SO We're interested
parties. Finally all We're allowed to sit
Mr.. Hooker's contention was that the
property in question was exempt from
taxation under the statute which eX-
empts property used for charitable pur-
poses He gave a detailed statement of
the expenditures of the lodge the past
10 years in sick benefits, care of the sick
funeral benefits support of odd Fellows
at the Gill Home in Ludlow, etc. as
bearing on the question as to whether
the property was used for charitable
PURPOSES This statement showed that
they had expended for such purposes
since the building was bought So, Hiss
He read a letter from the clerk of the
board of assessors in Burlington showing
that the property of the odd Fellows
lodge in that city was not taxed and thai
there was no tax on the Masonic TEN
pie in Burlington. Mr., Hooker said tina
Col Hasl<ins appeared before the board
Of assessors a few years ago and argued
that the Masonic temple should not be-
taxed as it was a charitable institution
under the law.
Col. Haskins stated that Mr.. Hooker
reference to his action relative TO the
Masonic temple was true, but since th'
question under consideration had come
up he had made a thorough investigation
of the subject and had become convinced
that the Masonic temple was taNapl
and all other property in Vermont owned
by fraternal organizations was taxable
Replying to questions asked by Col. Has