Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1913-03-06


law is repealed they may force the
man to pay it back and it. would Gre
ate a hardship upon him, in order to
place it back in the savings bank
where he does not have to pay tax.
/ Mr.. MARSTON of Skowhegan: Mr.
Speaker, | want to say for the bene-
fit of the gentleman from Portland
tMr. Rolfe) that there is one other
community beside Aroostook county
where the facts, as stated by the gen
tleman from Houton, are true, and
that is in Somerset county. | am not
going to make any speech upon this
matter, but | hope that the motion will
not prevail.
/ Mr.. AUSTIN of Phillips: Mr..
Speaker, | do not propose to discuss
this matter at length, neither from the
. position that this is a poor mans leg
islation nor a rich mans legislation
but | want to call the attention of the
members of the House to just what
were the provisions of the law of 1911.
! Chapter 179 says that Section of
| Chapter 8 of the Revised Statutes is
/ hereby amended by adding at the
! close Of said Section the following
| by an individual or corporation and
J secured by mortgage on real estate sit
1 uated in this State"
Now. | submit that according to the
| letter Of that law all loans of money
made by an individual or corporation
| and secured by mortgage-whether or
not It is pretty good reasoning that
with little stretch OF the law saw
| ings banks and trust companies may
and should also be exempt from taxa
| ton on the amount of money thep
| have invested in real estate mort
| cages. AS | say, | am not discussing
| this from the standpoint of u poor
| man or rich man. | am simply dis
| GUESSING it from the point of view of
| one looking at the future revenue of
| this State. There is now pending be-
\ fore the committee on taxation a bill
| which specifically mentions savings
| banks and trust companies as being
| exempt, as to their funds invested in
| real estate mortgages. Why shouldn't
| they be exempt if private individual
| or corporation is exempt What
| would such exemption bring about
| 1t would bring about loss of revenue
| to this State of so, $40. That is
| something to be considered. Is the
1 man hiring money in any section of
! the State of Maine today, getting it
| even one-half per cent cheaper from
| the fact that this property is exempt
| from taxation? If he is not, it is not
| help to the borrower of money or
the poor man. | will submit to you
| further whether even the small money
| lender can be considered in the cate
CORY of the poor man. Finally. l will
submit to you as to whether YOU can
| longer compel the trust companies
and savings banks of this State to
pay tax of identically the same
| amount on the same kind of property
that private individuals are exempt
| from paying on.
Mr.. SARGENT of Portland: Mr..
Speaker, | have had fifty years eX-
perienee in hiring money. and for the
last thirty years | have hired any
where from $1,000 to 100000. and I
have paid as high as Il per cent. If
you waive this tax on mortgages the
man who hires the money has to pay,
he has to pay an extra tax. In reality
the State is not losing a dollar by re-
pealing this tax on mortgages. | have
looked up the assessors reports and
the argument has been made that if
we repealed this tax on mortgages we
would lose $5,000,000 and what is it
that they are now paying on money at
interest, over $4,000 900. Take it in
the whole state of Maine, and there
is more money taxed at interest today
than there was in 1906. You may pass
all these laws you have a mind to.
and you cannot tax the man who
lends the money. He won't be taxed.
| He will take it in the name of some
body in Boston, Chicago. or somewhere
else. and dodge the whole thing.
was talking with one of the members
of the Aroostook county delegation
when we wanted to repeal this law
and he said he was going to vote to
take the tax off of the rich man. Some
| men want to get II per cent. for their
| money. | paid II per cent. for money
| when this law was in existence. Take
it thirty years ago and ] guess | paid
a tax on % per cent of what | was
| worth. The State is not losing any
thing by repeating the tax on mort
| cages. This was one of the worst
| laws that we ever had in this State.
and we have demonstrated the fact
| that the State is not losing any money
by this measure. but giving it to tho
Ipoor man.
| Mr.. IRVING of Caribou. MIR. Speaker
it has been suggested and l make the
motion that the House take recess unit
$50 O'Clock this evening
| The SPEAKER. The Chair will state
| that the House by an order granted the
| use of the Hall of Representatives to DR.
w. V. Fisher for lecture this evening
Mr.. IRVING Then | withdraw my
motion, Mr.. Speaker | wish to state
now and here that this is not local is.
| sue; it is a Statewide matter, and was
| considered by the majority of the com
] mittee on taxation as such. There ap.
| peared in opposition to the repeal OF thai
| law as it now exists men from different
| parts of the State. They were not al
| bankers and neither were they all veal
| thy men. The point upon which youi
| committee decided to vote rested upon
| the effect of the law as generally applied
| to the State at large. | wish to call at.
| tention to the only town in the entire
State appearing in favor of the repeal
| nd il, nd