The Birmingham age-herald., 1907-07-10

alty for the punishment of the mill own CT and the parent for tt-enploying or re- hiring such pal tlcs 50 discharged without first getting s!.s permission of your ln- first getting the permission of your inspec- tor, will caution you that by an extreme provision or the law you can easily hur' the parties tbat We arc trying to help. We have the poor with us always, and It is as much IT culnb-,t lI1n th. business Of the state 'O pro,:le methods of work, and perhaps would he more entfC'ai 60 this class of our fellow eiriSeIis. than to provide ways how they should not work; and we should be exceedingly careful along this line.
 Lobby Bill.
 At your present session you failed to complete your ant-lobby bill. You have no bill on the calendar more protective of the interests of the people than this. If you will but consider that whenever you touch any large interest for taxes or otherwise, your halls swarm with lob byists, many of them in the guise of pl- trlots, yet most of them paid agents. When you touch the peoples interest, unfortunately there Is no paid lobbyist to represent them. The protection of their interest, the protection If the best interests of the state demand at your hands an anti-lobby law.
 Revenue Bill.
 Your revenue bill was ambiguous as regards the tax on money lenders and created some friction through the state because many construed 1t to nfean that any person who lends money, regardless of his business, has to pay a license. The code committee, as 1 understand, has restored this feature to read as formerly, limiting the tax to the party whose prin- cipal business it was to lend money and who had an office for that purpose. e!c.
 The revenue bill improperly compre- hended a special tax on any party in towns or cities who sells tobacco and cigars. This has been changed so as to embrace only, as I am sure your inten. was, the stand dealers in tobacco and cigars. not those who are paying a reg ular ad valorem tax.
 There hag been quite a bit of agitation on the franchise tax on foreign corpora tions, including foreign money lenders. l think this law has been grossly misrepre- sented and misunderstood. The tax it. self is exceedingly fair and .;beral to the foreign lender, and directly along the line of the constitution, and 1t is 'uanda- tory on you to impose it. This law, by misstatement has been distorted into such shape that it has the appearance of being dangerous and illadvlsed. I an sure that if this act was fully con prehended hv
 
 no sense of the word deterrent 10 bus mess, and the tax (about oae-tenth to one sixteenth of the amount charged on other business of a similar natnre) would not be onerous on any one. In other words. where the bank of Montgomery are charged 21a per cent laxes. that is if they are lending money at per cent ard add the entire tax 1t would amnu'r to BE per cent The foreign lender If nlll't n dollars pays 1A mills; or, if he were lend ing money at per cent and the entire tax was added to the loan It would te 6 1-6 per cent. This you will see is not onerous on foreign lenders and hvings hardships and es. "a Yy sn,~;nt to no ere who wishes to transact business in the state Yet the money market of the world is at present perturbed, and many of our best business men are appre- hensive, and believe t ineXpedient and untimely to introduce changed condi tons. however small: and while I think the repeal of law a bad precedent and will bring about bad results-for a sove- reign state should nominate. make and maintain It's own laws in its own way vet If you think 1t wise to repeal the clause increasing the franchise charges