Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1921-03-30

|
because I need the support Of every
vote in this House. I hope that
have shown you to some extent the
escape of considerable amount of
taxable property from taxation. I
will ask you not to forget the fact
that some escapes which are revealed
| in the probate courts pay too great
a share of taxation, and it seems to
| me that in the interest of justice the
people should again have the oppor-
| tunity to vote on the question OF
whethe: or not the Legislature shall
! have the authority to correct this
situation. If they so see fit; and I
hope, Mr. Speaker, that my motion
| will prevail. (Applause.)
Mr.. HINCKLEY of South Port
land: Mr.. Speaker, I have listened
with much interest to the earnest
| discussion of the gentleman from
Gardiner. Mr.. Gardiner. but I must
bear in mind, as you must bear in
mind, that this is not proposition
to tax intangible property, and that
/ has been the gist of the argument.
; There is no proposition before us at
| tempting to tax intangible property.
, have a feeling that we are not TAX
| ing the constitution of our State se,i-
ously enough. I have a feeling that
| he constitution Of the State of Maine
! should not be submitted to the peo-
pie for the purpose Of having this
| passed upon unless there is a great
/ demand for it, and unless a serious
! occasion arises. Two years ago this
+ s,f1 49, \ l,s
question to the people of this State.
( AS has been stated to you, the plat
forms of both of the great political
; parties declared in favor of this prop
osition. 1t may be that the people
did not understand. I believe they
did. believe if there was any
I question understood by the people
; of the State of Maine last Septem-
her, it was the question of the income
tax, because we have all had expert
ence with it. 1t is not a question of
intangible property; it is a question
of taxing incomes, and both political
! parties have declared in favor Of 1t,
and it was discussed in political
meetings to nv personal Knowledge
in different parts of the State. After
both political parties declaring in
favor of it, the great people of this
State of Maine, men and women who
went to the polls last September and
elected YOU and me, at the same time
said 1--WE are not in favor of an in
come tax" I say to you, gentlemen.
that it would be inconsistent, it
would be very presumptious on our
/ part to say to those people who elect
ed us and sent us here, you knew
enough to send us here, but you did
| not know enough to vote properly on
. the income tax proposition, and we
are going to send it back to you SO
that you can use better judgment
next time" Now that is all there
is to- the proposition. The peo-
pie did understand the income tax
proposition, and they did not
: want 1T. There is no way Of
getting at the intangible property and
the people of our State may get at
that some time, but 1t is not through
the INCOME tax a this time; and
submit 1T would be absurd and I'M
reasonable and unfair to the men and
women who registered by more than
10000 votes in this State only six
months ago that they were against
1t, to send it back to them and say
to them, You were wrong, and we
expect you to correct it." / say, 1t is
not within our province and it is not
fair, and I certainly hope the Legis-
lature will not adopt this proposition
and send this back so soon again to
the people.
II 80 H.
Speaker. it may be presumption on
my part to enter into this controver-
sy, but as a member of the commit
tee that listened to the evidence for
and against this proposition, / feel
that l should say just a word. We
have this morning had extreme pleas
ure of listening for the second time
to the able presentation of this case
by the eminent gentleman from Gar
diner, Mr.. Gardiner and / will say
to you, gentlemen of the House, that
you have listened to the same argu-
ment which was presented and the
same facts which were presented at
the hearing before the committee
when this. matter was heard, and at
that time the committee decided to
make the report upon this bill which
is now before you. So much in the
way of argument could be said both
for and against this measure, that 1t
would require great deal of time,
but I will simply say to you that the
principal points which attracted my
attention to this matter were from the
local standpoints. I realize that I am
here representing the city of Eastpor,t
and as representing that community
felt that this is no time to have
such measure committed to this
Legislature, and that this Is no time
to confuse the minds of the people
of our State with matters of taxa
ton.
1t seems to me. Mr.. Speaker, that
we are already taxed and re-taxed
and taxed again, and ! submit that
you are all well awre Of those facts.
We, in the city of PASSPORT. realize
very much in the way of revenue
from intangihles, so-called, and we
are not ready to have our resources
from that source taken away from
us, or having this matter referred to
the people Of the State, because we
cannot afford to get along without
them even for SO short a time as
might intervene between the time
when they were taken away from US
and the time when the State might
see fit to give them back to us. as the
case might be.
I bot