The Brattleboro daily reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1913-1955, 1915-03-06
MAY LOAN TO rs PER CENT
Continued from Page H.

for a fiat rate on intan2ibles and a1SoI
provided exemption from taxation for
money loaned at , per cent. Mr.. Miller
of Bethel expressed the belief that if
this amendment were adopted if would
the present law in possibly
improved form, but stated that he
much preferred the committee : bin
as did Mr.. Dickey of Barre town. al
though the latter did not think it went
far enough as he did not believe there
was any logical ground upon which an
offset could be granted and thought thn
tax law of 1912 had worked out very
we'll.
The Fairchild proposal of amendment
was then put to a vote and defeated bv
a large majority. Mr.. Wilson of C,bei /
sea then said that he believed the
people of the farming districts were
opposed to the five per cent law and
the flat rate on intangibles, and that
regardless of his personal opinions he |
wished to urge his proposed amend |
ment, striking out the fiat rate section
of the bill. Mr.. Hapgood of Peru
raised laugh by saying that he
thought 1.-THE Devil laughed when he
read this bill, and that he laughed
harder when he read the amendment. =
to be blotted out of the language, Mr..
Dickey of Topsham wanted to know
how the proposed law had worked out
in other states, but could get no answer
to his inquiry. The proposed Wilson
amendment as stated above was then
turned down by the house on vote
! of 10 to 63 and Mr.. Wilson withdrew
i his further proposal of amendment.
latter an attempt by Mr.. Stone of Yer
gennes, on behalf of several absentees.
, to get the bill made a special order for
next Tuesday morning at 1880 clock
! had been refused. other amendments
were offered by Dickey of Barre town
and Sticknev of STAFFORD. but the
house would not stand for any amend
ments whatever and the committee
bill was ordered to a third reading.
Whether there viii be further debates
on the matter is Il mooted question as
the majority in favor of the third
reading was but - votes and II very
slight effort on the part of the enemies
of the measure may result in its de
feat.
The house had a busy afternoon and
a large amount of business was trans
acted and ar the close Of the session
Speaker Weeks told the members that
they had done a good day 5 work BE
sides the regular work CT Il routine ma
ture there We're two special orders on
. the calendar. one being \ 81, an act re
lating TO trust companies ami SaNiu.
banks which had proposals Of amend
ment to the effect that if at any rcgu
ar dividend period such an institutio.
had a surplus OF more than Is per cen
It should declare a dividend as l&.g,
as could be made iii whole number
without rednting the surplus below /.
per cent Of the deposits. Mr.. Smitl
: Of ST. Albans city questioned the adviS
6 ability eff agreeing to the amendment
: but it was agreed to. Mr.. NcClarv O
Windsor. when qhefitd BY Mr. Procto
: of Proctor, explained that the bill
- raised the limit when dividend mus
+ be declared from the surplus from
{ TO II per cent. Mr.. Melendv of Lon
z donderry favored the bill hut il wa
g opposed by Mr. Moore of Ludlow an
/ Mr.. Jones of Shrewsbury and was fua
n ~ defeated by a rising vote OF G6 t
g 80. The other special order was hous
$ bill Al which has for its purpose tn
t. termination of the office Of the preser
q commissioner Of weights and measure
II and the making of the commissions
e. Of agriculture eX-oi1icio commissions
Of weights and measures and maxim
O his term of Office as such co-cXtensil
p with his term as the former. The hi
90 was further ordered to lie and be mad
.e a special order for next Wednesday,
1910 0 clock.
n Considerable debate was INDUCED
:. by the house over senate bill Il While
# would make habitual drunkenness
Il either party a cause for divorce. TT
bill came from the house comnitt'
on judiciary with favorable maiorit
and an unfavorable minority rero
and with proposals of amendment ma
ing habitual drunkenness for a pcrit
IN of three years a cause for divorce. NJ
Morse of Hardwick strongly favor,
the bill and urged that drunkenne
T. was a sufficient cause FOR divorce n
~ that it lead up to all the present leg
e. causes for divorce. Mr.. Stone OF Woo
re ford. Morse of HardWick, Stone of We
p gennes and Hapgood of Peru favor
II the bill, but We're opposed to the thrC
year amendment clause. Mr.. Wills
of Chelsea did not favor the idea
}. making drunkenness a cause for dvoI
in addition to those already ON {
he statutes and he was supported by n
some statistics on divorce i'm suppo
<, of his opposition to the bill. He thong
80 the present laws were sufficient a
IT, was not in favor of letting down t
Il bars and making divorce any easi
Mr.. Miller of Bethel said that the La
II" OF the state encouraged hasty IN;
ny rage and was opposed to the bill
at amended, regarding it as danecro
OF aud unworthy legislation, but Mr.. Sto
fd of Woodford insisted that when m
as had promised his Wife not to dri
TO and then lied to her and abused her 5
was entitled to the relief from t
bonds of matrimony as the bill graz
me ed. Mr. Fox of Rutland town then
Of manded the yeas and nays and the 1
ne as amended was ordered to thi
in reading.
me \ quick passage was given to |
for introduced by Mr.. Graham of Rockil