The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1868-10-01


expent itures above given, Indicates the regular
and legitimate army expenditures for the tscsl
ear ending June 30 1865, to have been S56,7l3,-
4l0, of which no inconsiderable part is justly
chargeable To the expenses attendant upon the
existence of Indian hostilities upon the Plains
in the summer and fall of 1867, which largely
and exceptionally augmented the cost of trans.
poIlation and subsistence. 80. ---....,
"Tbe military appropriations for the current
fiscal year are S33,0Sl 013."
We have copied the whole of Mr.. Wells
statement under the head of "War Depart
ment," so that our readers may see how 1t
meets and oonfutes Seymour's fasehood. You
may choose to considers Subsistence OF ln-
dians," "Freedmen's Bureau" and "Recou-
struction Expenses" fairly chargeable to the
current war account under Seymour's arraign-
ment: so we will add them to the $56 713 4l0
that MIR. Wells considers the legitimate cur
rent expenses of maintaining our army, and
we now have total of s62 62S, 6S0-not nearly
half the sum charged by Governor Seymour as
the cost of "an army to keep the South in sub
jection;" whereas, all men do know that
very large portion of these sixty-two millions
were expended in the North aud West, but
especially in protecting our pioneers and
fighting Indians on the Plains and in the
mountains.
And yet the World, in the face of this
crushing exposure, attempts to bolster up
Seymour as follows:--
"Mr. Wells was instigated to cook up his
figure by Republicans, who feared the damag-
ing effect of Governor Seymour's statement
that the expenses of the War Department this
year weuld amount to $3.50 00O0 600. Mr.. Wells,
by taking merely the Regis er's accounts and
omitling all reference TO the Treasurer's ac-
counts, easily made The sum less. MIR. Delmar
gives both, and enables us to know the total,
nl0n noes not soetiay % uavr d ron 6oyepnOf
cost, curing the fiscal year ending July l, the
following sums:- --.
Treasurer's expenditures"............. "a 26S S76
ro,oI oI,- on so,
Considering that Governor Seylnours speech
was made in April, and that the fiscal year did
surprisingly close; We suppose nobody will be
hardy enough 10 deny that there are two sets OF
accounts, s as mr: Deimsr states, nor that ms
books OF each." F.I q
1.-THE War Department COST" says the
World. Was that Governor Seymour's asser-
ton? Did he complain OF the $3S, ,000, 900
paid as bounties to our volunteers for their
services in putting down the Rebellion Or
of the $40, 1880, 100 paid from the Federal Trea-
sury to the States for equipping and arming
their soldiers years ago to fight the Rebels !?
Or the $5, Ill, 300 paid for property destroyed
or lost in the military service of the Union ?
Or the 1892, $50 paid for the decent burial OF
our dead heroes in National cemeteries Or
the 1852 600 paid to the survivors of Bslle
Isle, sal sbury, and Andersonvlle as commu-
taton of rations while famishing in Rebel
prisons? Or the So, 1872 620 spent last year in
improving the navigation of our rivers and the
accessibility and safety of our harbors Did
| Governor Seymour complain of these outgoes
as needless and improvident Did he let his
hearers know that the money disbursed upon
| the warrants Of the War Department had SO
largely been paid to satisfy just claims grow.
| ing out of the late struggle with armed Rebel
| lion, or to construct public works required by
industry and the arts of peace What had the
sixty-odd millions thus expended to do with
excepting the people of the South in subjec-
| tion P''
Reader! you know that somebody lies-wck
edly, villainOusly lies-with regard to these
war expenditures If zoe do say so frankly
Courtesy is well in its place, but truth before
all things ... ..... ...