Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1828-05-30
632.675 81
!1!,Sli 73
O32,O1o 81
T1,6T9 So

Difference, Sl45, I36 So
lh:s difference The committee believe TO be the
true result of comparison made, upon correct
principles, between the late and present Admins
trations, as To the expenditures with which the
State Department is connected.
The Secretary of State in the letter already re-
fcrred to, says that the excess of the expenditures
OF the present Administration, i'll this branch of the
public service, over those Of the last Adninistra-
ton, may be satisfactorily accounted for, first bv
the fact off, remittance in December last 10
our European bankers, of $40 ,O00 which is charr-
ed to the service oi the year 1927 although il Will
bc disburscd in the year IS2S' and secondly, by
the circumstance that no part OF the appropriation
OF one hundred thousand dollars, made in 1922
tor missions 10 South America, was applied
until the succeeding year. In relation TO the
first circumstance, the committee would remark
that although requiston made ON the 9Th day
oil December last, by the State Department, on the
Treasury, for the sum OF $4,000, to be RENTED
10 our European bankers, yet it appears that only
$4,000 of that sum was RENTED in that month,
and that that amount only is charged in the ac-
counts of the expenditures OF 1927. The balance
OF the sum, S3l 900, was not RENTED until the
18th oil January OF the present year, and is charged,
among the expenditures of 1923. (See letter of
Secretary of State, marked d. and the accompany
ing statement Of Chief Clerk of the Treasury; see
also, letter from Joseph Nourse, Register, marked
~ 1t moreover appears that, in providing
for the foreign service OF the Government nothing
as more common than 10 make remittauces TO
Europe toward the close of one year, which can
not be discussed till the succeeding year; as for
example, III 1924, there RENTED 20 Eurona
between the 9TH day of October and the last dav nj
december OF that year, for the service of the State
department, IN bills drawn payable sixty DAYS af
ter sight, the sum of SD $50 90, while the whole
amount RENTED in like form, between the same
Gates in the last year, was only $4,000 (See
letter from Joseph Nourse, marked e and accom-
panying stateinent.) This circumstances th~r.-
fore, SO far as it affects the comparison which has
been made between the late and the present Adj
minisraion, with reference TO the expenditures of
the State Department, operates in favor of instead
OF against, the present Administration
In relation to the other circumstance ncn,ioooa
hy the Secretary Of State, satisfactorily account
ing for the difference in the expenditures of ~,
Department under the late and the present Admit
israton, it IS true that part Of the APPROXIMATION
made in 1922 for missions TO South America. was
applied until the following year: but il WAS then
applied under the Disadvantage incident to the ORR
ginal equipment of the missions, of SUSTAINING =,
double charge, Including outfits, as well as s5l,.
ries, which would thus make the expenditures of
one year equal 10 those OF two, in ordinary cir
cuHstances. Such would have been the effect
II #hat was understood TO be the plan OF the last
Administration, in regard TO our diplomatic estob
iishment in South America, had been adhered IN
by the present. 1t is ia the recollection of n ma,
5ority OF the committee, that, in some proceedings
OF the House OF Representatives on that subject
during the session OF i523-24 il was stated bv III
Chairman of the Committee Of Ways and n
on the authority of communications derived fron,
the then Secretary of State, that the Governn,cnt
contemplated, after that year. having only one Min
ISter OF the highest grade in South America and
Tor such interests as were not committed to him
10 employ Charges, Commercial Agents. mr. Con-
stis, according as one or other of these kinds os
functionaries might be deemed most proncr Ar
arrangement OF this sort, the committee believe
would have been fully adequate TO the protoc,ior
Of all our interests, and the fuliilment of All orr
obligations as nation, and would have avoiII
much Of the expense that has been incurred a.,
il the present Administration have been ,,eccesoy
~ subjected TO greater expense than the last
from an extension OF our diplomatic Embellishments,
in America, they have, at the same time bno, ra
Eeyed by reduction OF that establishment in En-
rope. During the last three years OF the late Al
Jninistration, we had Minister Plcnipotentiarv NJ
Lisbon, who recalled shortly before The ciosa.
OF that Administration, and replaced by a CHARGE
dAfieires. The return of our Minister at M ,drid
about the same time, afforded a good opportunitv
of reducing, in like manner, the grade and . -
Pense OF the mission to that court; and it was, in
deed, distinctly stated 10 the House of Repreaeu
tayes, the occasion before alluded TO that erch
was the intention Of the Government The com
mttee, therefore, cannot recognize in either nj
the circumstances appealed 10 by the Secretary oil
State the force aud effect which he sftr;but.s g.
chem.
The Secretary Of State, after presenting tbe
comparison aforementioned, embracing equal me-
RODS OF three years, suggests q comparison be-
tween the two last years OF the late Adfninistra-
uon and the two hrst OF the present; the effect of
which is 10 select from the last Administrator the
two years Of heaviest expenditure and put them
jn contrast with two of the present Administrator
exempt from those peculiar and extraordinarv
charges which deyolved upon the two years of the
last Administration chosen for the coiDpars,s -
The committee. for the reasons Just rnenIjsm;ed
consider the comparison first made altogether fair.
and, embracing longer periods Of time less la
bic TO be influenced in its results by casual or TEN
r5fary circumstances.
10 be Confinued1
----se>e..--
SATURDAY, MaY 24
IN SENATE