Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1870-10-07

asss<zzssssssrzzs
was paid off the d, BIT Sl12, 600, 600. Al
lowing for the $40, 100000 of increase
during the previous yeaI, the net result is
$92, 900, 000paid off under Grant Boutwell,
against Sl47, 600, 900 paid off under John
son-McCulloch. "
81 nHch fer The claim of having FIST
reduced the public deb. When it is
stated that even the amount that was paid
off this year vas 10 consequence of laws
of taxation and appropriation which were
enacted under lhe .Iohnson-M cC ulloch
administration, and could not possibly
have been in consequence of any meas
ures enacted or practised since that time;
the claim of the administration is shown
not only to be baseless as to the merit of
having brought about the first reduction
of the debt, but baseless as to the merit
of having brought it about all.
Mr.. Dclmar then proceeds TO dissect
the assertion of the Radicals that they
have increased the resources, and at the
same time lowered the taxtS. On these
points he says:
''The other claim of the administra-
tion, that the revenues have been in
creased while the taxes have been di-
unfinished, might be disposed of Just as
summarily as that relative 10 the debt.
For if the revenues have been increased in
consequence of lowering of the rates of
taxation, they could not have been in
creased, consequence of any lowering of
the inrates under the present adminisira-
ton, seeing that the only law in which
the rates had been lowered, and which
has been enacted since the Grant admins
tTation, does not 90 into effect until some
time next fall. IL the revenues have in
creased in consequence of the tax, laws
that CccasioDed such increase Of revenue
must be credited TO President johnson,
and not to President Grant. II cannot
seriously be meant that the assumed in
crease Of revenue is The cause, and lower
taxes the effect; In other words that the
taxes have been lowered in conse-
qucnce of the increase of the reve.
nues. For if such be the case,
and the increased revenues are
due az has been shown, not to any meas
ures enacted under Grants administration
but to the measures enacted under John
sons administration, then the present
lowering Of rates is to be credited to
Johnson. And even this lowering Of
certain taxes, which only goes into effect
in the future, is more than balanced by
the raising of others; and moreover was
effected by Congress, which in this re-
spect ignored the recommendation of the
| administration, an administration that has
| on all occasions been in favor of keeping
the taxes up, 50 as to secure TO the Treas
ury surplus wheTewilh TO pay off bonds;
and il by Congress, contrary to the
recommendation of the administration,
this credit of the future belongs to Con-
gress, and not 10 the administration.
Both Grant and Boutwell, have again and
again insisted that the revenues ought to
be kept up, that the time had not yet
come to diminish them, that it was de-
sirable 10 pay off as much of the debt as
possible, and that they needed large reve-
nues for this purpose.
mo! what is meant by the cunningly-
wordod claim of the Administration is
that the revenues have increased in con-
sequence Of a better administration of
the laws.
SIN this claim we are asked 10 believe
two things. 1sL That the revenues hare
increased. ID. That they have increased
| in consequence of the increased efficiency
in the administration of the laws. Now
| such is the nature of the second PROPOSE
| ton, that should the first one be refused,
| it must inevitably share IFS fate and fall.
Fer if the measure of increased eff
cheney of administration is increased rev.
enues, it follows that decreased revenues
would meet out only decreased efficiency
of administration.
every good. Now IT happens that the
revenues this year Q87O) were S411, OOO.-
600 and last year 1891, 900, OOO-whilc in
1868 they were S4O6, 900, 900; in 1867,
$491, 0O0, 900, and in 1866, 1863, 900, 900.
In other words that the revenues under
the Grant administration have been much
smaller than they were before. So much
for claim number two.
Instead of the financial policy of the
Grant administration being strong in point
ct fact or application to the needs of the
country, Mr.. Delmar demonstrates it is
the weakest part of the present admins
tration. So weak as to be entirely ire
parable; that it has so blundered and
failed in this ADMINISTRATION, that nothing
short of an entire change of men and
measures can help the country andshat
the bold front which has been presented
by the administration, has been affected
With view TO cover up this organic inca
pacity, and hide it from the people. In
this also they will fail, and meet a de
served defeat at the coming election.