The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1868-09-07
Can't Make Balance Sheet.

IRON the ". Y. World.
Is it not time that the Republican papers
made the amend honorable to Governor Ssy-
mour for the outcry they raised against his
lntlmatlon, in his letter of acceptance, that it
is impossible to learn the real state of the ma
tional finances 2 The correctness of that init
nation is fully demonstrated by the very
papers that raised the outcry. What, for
example, is the amount of the public debt ?
On the 8th of August, the Tribune stated it at
81, SOC, 52S, $50. On the 18th of August the
same Tribune stated it at 81, $40, ,0O0, 600. Be-
fore the month of August ended the same
Tribune again stated it at 81, ,491, 1924, Az. And
all three Of these contradictory statements, be
it noted, professed to be the amount of the
public debt, less the money in the Treasury
at the same identical date-the first of August.
This is pretty tumble of contradictions for a
paper that howled at Governor Seymour for
intimating that it is not easy to get at the
truth respecting the national finances.
Not only does the Tribune thus contradict
itself, but all the other authorities contradict
1t and each other. Commissioner Wells stated
in his recent report that there WAS an excess
OF income over expenditures within the last
year of $34, 1877 which, if true, would
have diminished the public debt by lust that
amount. But Secretary McCulloch states
that the debt has been increased within the
year Sl2, 22o, ,054, making an enormous dis
crepancy of $46, ,977, S31. The Tribune. teased
and bewildered by irreconcilable contradic-
tlons, was driven to confess, yesterday, that
1t knows not the truth on this subject and is
without the means to get at it. 1t ought
then, to apologize to Governor Seymour for
its unmerited abuse.
The Tribune has several times oontended
that $32, 600 900 which appear in the debt
statement of Mr.. McCulloch does not strictly
belong there. We are clearly of opinion that
1t does, with the advantage having the Seo-
retary on our side. But we will not argue the
point now, because even if we were to con-
cede the claim of the Tribune, there would
stlll be discrepancy of S15, ,00O,OO which
that journal cannot account for; whereas with
system OF honest and we'll kept accounts.
the people should know TO dollar what use
had been made of their money. The Eueninq
PoSt takes up the subject which the Tribune
seems to abandon in despair, and thinks it
can account for the discrepancy of $15 900, 600.
We copy the EoSt'S fancied elucdation:-
"There remains, in round numb bers, a balance
or hfteen million dollars paid tor some purpose
which the z. ibulle and its correspondent can.
no. discover. Wner5 IS ii?
THE answer is contained In the debt state.
ment itself; which shows that the amount Of
drawn by funding or payment during the year
was S9OOOO,OOO These notes appeared in tho
cent. Interest; but in fact they b1re the ac.
interest of from two to three years
upon tnem. ThlS interest has been paid or
funded during the year, and has thus az.
peared In the statement of the debt. 1t was
as really due year ago as it is now, and its
appearance is but a nominal, not real in
crease.
"Had these notes all matured before pay
lnent, the interest thus made principal would
nave amounted to nearly eighteen millions of
dollars; but as some of them were received in
payment for hve-twenties before maturity it is
but air to suppose that they are about enough
TO account for the fifteen millions of dollars in
question"
This will not do. In the first place, it is
purely conjectural and supported by no fig
ures. In the next place, it is in fatal collision
with the statement of Commissioner Wells,
who included in his account of expenditures,
the interest on the compound notes. He said
that there was surplus of nearly thirty five
millions over and above all expenditure for in
terest as means of reconciling the contradic-
tion. The part of the debt which draws in
terest is only about 81, 10000 which, if it
were all at six per cent. (some of it is only at
three) would make the annual interest account
only $l26,O0 900. But Mr.. Wells makes the
interest paid last year $l41, 625, 551-an excess
IN the interest account of nearly $4,000, 600.
This excess can be explained only by the pay
ment OF the accrued interest on the compound
notes. The Posts explanation therefore falls
to the ground, and the confusing contradic-
ti0ns remain.