The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1911-12-02


study the question at close range,
and his conclusions are entitled to
especial attention, as those Of a we'll
informed and unbiased mind. One
thing in Brother Howe we have al
ways liked--hs clear views on most
public matters and his unusual readi-
ness 10 give reasons for the faith that
is in him.
Yet other strong members OF both |
general assemblies that have wrestl |
ed with this subject came to- a diff
ferent conclusion. In 1908, the rec
concentrations of the special tax
commission were turned down finally,
though they included the fiat rate
plan In 1910, no one had any idea
that its ghost could be resurrected
until at the very last there cropped
out the strong sentiment to do
something" for tax reform, and the
fiat rate idea being put forth at this
juncture, to the surprise of every
body, 1t carried in both houses. only
to meet death through guberna-
torial veto.
Taking up some of the points made
by the Banner. The estimate that
the intanHbles that would be lost
out of the local grand lists by the
change to a uniform low rate would
amount TO ten per cent of the lists
was not the estimate of this paper,
but of an advocate of the fiat rate,
based on some investigation in his
own town and by him assumed TO be
general throughout the state. 1t did
not pretend to be accurate, but is
quite as likely to overrun ten per
cent as to fall short OF it. Consider
ing that the term "intangibles" in
cludes not only money, but also
stocks, bonds, notes and all evidences
of credit and investment. we do not
regard the estimate of ten per cent
as unreasonable
The bill OF 1910, as The Banner
says. did provide that the revenues
from intangibles should go to the
state in lieu OF the eight per cent
state school tax and the five pei
cent state highway tax The measure
of 1905 did not contain this provision
which in our opinion. lent the bill OF
1910 no added strength, though calcu-
lated to win votes for it, Depending
on an unknown quantity. such as the
revenues from intangibles admittedly
would be, to aid in the support OF our
schools and highways, in place OF
known adequate revenues, would not
appeal to many persons as enlighten-
ed statecraft. The money for these
| purposes must come from somewhere
or these important public services
will be seriously crippled. No repre-
sentative who thought twice, especi'
ally those from the small and poor
towns that profit most from the dis
| tributIon OF the state school and high
way taxes, would care to throw away
substance for shadow in this way.
The point we made in former ar
ticle-which. il seems to us, The Ban
ner does not seriously disturb-was
that the local taxes on intangibles (oi
all kinds) whether they amounted 10
ten per cent of the whole, or more, or
less. would definitely and certainly be
| lost from the local tax revenues, and
the burden now borne by them would
be shifted TO other shoulders, viz, the
payers OF taxes on tangible property,
| like farms, houses, lands and visible
personal property-classes that nov
bear their full share. and some OF
whom. especially mortgaged real es
tate holders, are grievously Cypress
ed. As against this definite certain
~ there is only the unexplored realm
of expectation, supposition and con
lecture. For visible cutting down
of the grand list. with consequent in
crease in tax rate and in taxes 10
other classes, we have merely the in
visible yagueness of possible in
direct return somewhere. sometime
in lowered interest rate to the Dor
rover. =.
We believe that this possibility Is
thin and remote. We do not believe
that low tax rate on intangibles
would uncover them in any consider
able quantity With the banks an6
savings institutions occupying th'
position In popular favor that they
, now do. both toward depositors ant
, borrowers. and with even the sam'
tax rate upon them and individual lei
ders. the latter could not hope L
, place their money at lower rates thai
the accepted interest rate, and still
/ realize as much as their money nov
in banks brings them, il the care wor
n ~ and trouble, and the placing o
: their funds out OF reach at will ar
TO count at all. II Deacon Jones 4
realizing four per cent on his saving
= deposits. compounded twice yea
= 1.-TWO per cent every six months) ca
4 draw any or all of his money any da
he wants to, and is virtually care fire.
:, is IL at all likely that he will with
n draw the money and lend II to Brothe
n Johns boy at five per cent. pay seN
q en-tenths per cent tax. and for a pa
a try three mills on dollar assume tn
~ task of placing the loan, looking afte
q It, taking the risk that Brother John
boy won't pay principal and intere'
promptly and fixing II so that, anywa
he can't get the money or any pa
OF II until payments are due to wha
ever need he may come meanwhil,
And unless this faint hope can be r
allied what have we to show for u
loss In town grand lists that will fC
low the fiat rate adoption For
IL II noted that while the special fav'
y extended to all classes OF intangible
Oh by such tax reduction would
" claimed Immediately by all OF theI
so far as dropping out would go. II
'e by no means certain that all of the
n, would reappear to be taxed under Il
lu other form.
~ The contemporary makes a plea 4
Is the poor tax dodger that we shou
m hardly expect from II. The same q
ne gument was put forth during the d
cussion before the House in 1908
t., certain members who, with tears