St. Charles City Republican intelligencer. [volume] (St. Charles City [Charles City], Iowa) 1857-1861, 1859-08-11

MS report OF estimates, states the ap
propriations made by former acts OF
Congress, applicable from year to year,
and not included in the annual appro.
priation bills, at $s,397,72l.5O (; and
balances of appropriations extending
into this year, at Sl2, ,46S. 902 2S-
amounting in all to $62, ,344, ,327.7s, to
which add the amount of the Post Of
flee Appropriation Bill, S20,495,7ss
now being anticipated by the Post
Master General, and we have Ss2, ,S4O,-
1873, for the fiscal year ending June
80, 1860. To this sum must be ad.
ded the amount of the indefinite ap-
preparations, and the interest on the
new public debt of $40, 900, 900. au-
thorized at the last session of Con-
gress Hence it is not probable that
the expenditures will fall short of
$50 o.0oO for the year ending June
80, 1860.
1t will be seen from the official
records cited, that the expenses of the
! government have increased from an
average Of about 10000, 900 in lS4O,
tothe enormous amount of about $780,
600, 600 per annum, under the rule Of
this newly organized Democratic par
ty.
And when the attention of the peo-
pie is called to this prohigate use of
the public treasure, the more candid
leaders of the party in Iowa admit
the expenditure of the money, but de-
fcnd its necessity and deny that the
amount is extravagant.
AS an illustrious example of all the
rest, | have before me carefully pre-.
pared printed speech, "on the expen-
ditures of the government" purport-
ing to have been delivered before the
Democratic Club, on the 10th of last
September, by Charles Mason, Ex-
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
of Iowa, and Ex-Commissioner Of Pa
tents, in which, after verbal criti-
cism, a9 h0miaem-better suited to a
smaller man, as puerile and inconclu-
sive in logic as incorrect in data, the
author labors through twelve or four.
teen pages Of solid matter in mas
terly defense of the expenditure of
Ss4, 900, 900, by this administration, as
uaifabie and economical! The argu-
ment when analyzed, is deduction
from comparison of the average an
nual expenses Of the government dur
ing the eight years of Mr.. Monroe's
administration. which he states at
Sl2, 500 900 with the expenses of the
current year, considered in connection
with the increase of our population,
claimed by him to have become three
fold, and the expansion of our terri
tories, said by him to have quadru-
pied and the diminution Of the value
of the dollar, as he says, to less than
thirds,-and the exclusion of GER
tain revenues and expenditures, (as
those of the Post Office Department.
now included in the estimates, which
were then excluded He suggests
that an increase of expenses in pro-
portion to the increase of population
would require S37 500, 900 per amum,
and if in proportion to expansion of
our possessions, $50, 100000 per an
nun, and adopts as a mean between
them $40, 100000 and observes that
40, 100000 in 1920 was of more in
trinsic value than $50, 1000, 900 at the
present day and insists that the ex-
penditure of the remaining $24 4,O0O,-
900 may be satisfactorily accounted
for from other causes. The conclu-
sion of his argument is in these words:
So far, then, from being liable to
the charge of increased and increas-
ing extravaganza, / feel justified in
asserting. that the government during
the present year will be administered
with more comparative economy than
was that of President Monroe"
will not enter into detailed ex-
posure of the fragrant errors of his
data as stated, and the gla:;ng fallacy
of his reasoning. This is no more
necessary for my purpose than un-
weaving the meshes of the spiders
web across his path, is for the prog
ress of the traveller. l admired the
genius displayed in its construction,
and have no ill-will for the author, but
as its only design is to entrap the un.
wary, l propose simply to brush it
away.
As sample of the inaccuracy and
deceptive character of the whole
speech, and of-those which will follow
during the approaching campaign,
from this as text book, cite the
following from page I:
1t was stated by Mr.. Letcher on
the floor of Congress, and not contra
dicted as far as | know, that in 1915,
the States and organized Territories
Of the United States covered space
of 759,5s4 square miles, while at the
present time they embrace an area of
3,26S 900. Since that time and prior
to 1920, we acquired the Floridas,
with surface Of $4,000 square miles.
But even with these added, we see
that the present area is more than four
times what it was in 1920"
Compare this with the statement of
the area of the United States, on page
32 Of the census reports of 1850:
Area of the U. S. at peace Of
The purchase of Louisiana lin
1915, ........,...... .S9J, ,oI3
The purchase OF florida Gn
lSl9,b. b....-........ ......... b,5O
Oregon (owned before 1920 800. .052
Total area before 1920. ....... 2,095.2 2l1
Texas acquired since,) .3lS, 900
Acquisitions from Mexico, pre-
vious to l85OD OD.............. 522 ,955
Total area at present, (except
Gadsden purchase, 1886 ,l66
Gadsden purchase, se,..............27,5 q 500
Total at present time, ....... 1858 ,666
From this statement it is seen that
the territory Of the United States was,
in 1920, more than two-thirds of its
present size and hence the expenses
Of the government according to this
ratio Of Increase, should be but $l8,-
750, 900 per annum, and not fifty MIL
lions as assumed This one correction
will make sad havoc with his conclu-
! sion, if we were to admit, which we