Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1835-02-23


sole will, till placed by an ac, of consesss md,
INC custody OF the laws. Whether any proyisio
Gun oe devised, which would place tbem as mno
ooyonu the control of the Executive in their pre-.
CIV 10 'hey were IN their former place of denosite
'u "hIeh at the same time Mould not endanoo
".' s"'e.y, are points on which your committee d,
''o' uccm II necessary 10 venture an opinion. VIVA
| a"ui'loh this unlimited control over the nnhli,
'uhlS, from the time of their collection ill that n
,ne'r expenditure, makes 10 the patronage of III,
executive, Is difficult 10 estimate According IL
.ne report and statement Of the Secretary Of thf
'eaSury' the amount ofthe public funds in depos
W. y" 'he ISL January, 1854, was Ill, 70a 50,
anu 'hclr estimated amount on the 3lst Deeemh.,
aS'' was $S,b95,9 Sl making an average amour,
lot inc year OF 10 1879 443 dollars the use of which
considering the perman !ncy of the denos,tes NAV
DC es'ih'a'ed as not Of less value TO the banks IN
"n'ch they were deposited than four per cont
making at that rate on the average amount in de.
positc the sum OF Ssi07,977 per annum This i'm.
hiense gam to these pc werul and influential mo.
nopo''es depends upon the will and pleasure of the
Executive, and must give him a corresponding con
troll over them. But this OF itself affords a y,rv nm
perfect view OF the extent of his patronage depen.
deht on his control over the public depostcs. To
ascertain Its full extent the advantages which these
oa'hs nave In consequence of these depostes. IN
e"eu'otinS their notes and in dealings in oxchans
es' and The competition which it must excite among
'''e oahkS generally 10 suppant each other in these
advantages and OF course in Executive favor ON
"h'eh they depend, and which must tend to crea,e.
on 'heir part, a universal spirit of dependence and
suoservlency ; the means which the depos,,es ne.
cessaf'y Afford TO raise depress at pleasure the
'a'ue OF the stock of this or that bank and the
"'uc he'd which is consequently opened to the mi.
Ha'e' ParHsons OF power for the accumulation of
'o'"hes oy speculaIIons In bank stock the faclli-
0es ~h,ch all these causes combined must give to
Po''''ca 'aVorltes, IN obtaining bank accommo la
uons and finally, the control which the accompa.
nyng power of designating the notes of what bank,
may, and what may not be received in the public
dues, gives TO the Executive over these institutions
must be taken INTO the estimate to form a correct O.
p'hion oil the full force of his tremendous engine of
power and influence, welded, as things now stand
by the Will of a single individual
Your committee have now enumerated the princi-
pat Causes, which have Of late contributed 10 IN.
crease SO greatly the patronage of the Executive.
There are others still remaining to be noticed Inch
have greatly contributed to this increase, and which
dam the most serious consideration but as they
are OF an incidental character is pro to con.
sldtr them IN their proper connection, in subse-
quent part OF this report Having completed, un-
uer lis proper head, the inquiry 10 the extent
OF Executive patronage, and the of It's re-
cent increase, your committee will nov proceed
to investigate the deeply Interesting questions of
the expcdlcncy and the prec,,c,bilty of its reduc-
ton
In considering the question of the expedency OF
IT'S red iction, your committee do not deem 1t
sary 10 enter into an elaborate argument TO prove,
that patronage, at beet, is but necessary evil that
It's tendency where il is effecualIy checked and
nfoI I.I,,
and that It is, oc course fundamental maxim in
oil States having free and popular institutions that
no more should be tolerated than is necessary TO
MAINTAIN the proper efficacy of Government How
little this principle essential to the preservation
OF liberty IN popular governments, has been respect
ed under ours, the view which has already been
presented of the vast extent to which patronage has
already attained under this government and Its IA
pld growth, but TOO clearly demonstrate. But, as
great and as rapid as has been ITS growth it may
be thought by some, who have not duly reflected
upon the subject that it is not more than Sufficient
TO maintain the Government in its proper efficiency,
ard that 1t cannot be diminished without exposing
our institutions TO the danger Of weakness aud an.
archy. To demonstrate the utter fallacy Of such a
su1pos'tlon, it is only necessary to compare the
present the past III reference 10 the point under
consideration.
that the patronage of the executive branch of this
Government, in any stage of its existence from the
time it went fairly into operation, has ever proved
fcient in proper influence and control; yet, If the
present be compared with any past period OF our his
tory, excluding Of course that Of the late war; the
patronage now under the control of the Executive
will be found greatly to exceed that of any former
period. To illustrate the truth of this remark, you
Committee will select, for comparison, the year
1925, and 1888 the former, because II was thought
even then, by many Of the most experienced am
rejecting Of our czers, that Executive patronage
had attained dangerous extent and the latter
because II was the latest period OF which We have
the requisite materials, with which 10 make ,h'
comparison. What, then, is the comparative ex
tent of Executive p tronage, respectively, with the
short interval of but eight ycurs between them
What, a, these respective periods, was the amour
OF the revenue and expenditure What the mum
her of persons in the employ of the Government, OF
dependent on lis bounty and what the extent ic
which, according to the practice of the respective
periods, the patronage of the Government wa
brought to exert over those subject 10 It's control
short comparative statement will show.
The income of the Government, in all its branch
cs, including the Post Office, VAS, in 1928, ;2o,
l47 1888, and in 1888, $50, 6G7,2H The gross ex
pendture including the public debt, IN 1879, wa'
$2i 6l4 SE in 1888, 1927, 229 ,3S9. Excluding TN
public debt, it was, in 1925, Sl2, 7l95O3; IN 1888
$25, 685 8i6. The number of persons employe.
and living on the bounty OF the Government, II
1928 SIS, TT; in 1898, 10000.
Measuring the extent Of the patronage, at thes
respective periods, BY these clements combined
without taking into consideration the circumstance
which, as already shown, have, in this short perlo5
given such increased force TO Executive patronage
the result OF the whole, IN 1925 compared To 1883