Lamoille newsdealer. [volume] (Hyde Park, Vt.) 1860-1877, 1870-02-15
Washington Correspondence.
MR.. DAWES ON THE PUBLIC EXPENDITURE


LHS ScuSdtiOu VI thS ioot iho WOUND lidS
been the speech of Hon. Henry l.. Dawes
of Massachusetts,, arTaigning the admins
tration on the charge that it is not carry
out in practice the professions Of economy
upon which it was placed in power. Such
a speech, coming from the chairman Of
the Committee on Appropriations, and
from Republican besides, was well
calculated to create an excitement, both
among the friends and the enemies of the
administration Some Of the former have
been much alarmed on account of the i'll
effect which they imagined the speech
would have upon the prospects of the Re-
publican party, and have berated Mr..
Dawes soundly for the part he has taken.
To mc their fears seem to have been su-
perauous. The effect of the speech will
be to induce the most rigid scrutiny Of
all proposed expenditures, and the utmost
ffugality in the conduct of public affairs.
1t inaugurates a species Of competition in
economy between the Legislative and exc
cutive branches of the Government, the
tendency of which must be to reduce ex-
penses to the minimum. The people will
profit by this competition, in reduced tax
es, or increased contributions to the pay
mcnt of the national debt, and will be lit
tie inclined to Withdraw their confidence
from parry which presents them with
practical results Of so satisfactory ma
turc.
Of course, Mr. Dawes charges Of ex-
travagancc will be industriousIy circulated
by the Democratic press, bat even suppos-
ing the case to have been as bad as he
seemed to think it, the fact will remain,
that it was Republican and not Dem
ocrat who called attention to the evil =
and it's correction, by the cutting down OF
all superGuous estimates, will be due to a
Republican Congress.
But the truth is, that the wholesome
discussion, to which the speech gave tise,
has shown that the estimates it assailed
will bear examination far better than Mr.
Dawes seemed to think. Indeed, the on.
" charge which, if sustained, would have
given the Democracy any substantial
ground for seIf-gratulatiou, has been dis
tinctly disproved.
We refer to the statement that the es
tinatcs Of the present administration were
in excess Of those presented year ago By
Andrew johnson Mr.. Dawes first speech
was evidently made under the force o.
impressions somewhat too hastily formed
1t is due him to say that he was mislec
BY the figures of the estlmate-books, !. E..
the books of which one is prepared eact
year at the Treasury Department, givins
4 in detail the items of expenditure fer The
next fiscal year, with the estimated amoun
required for each. La the general footing
up the aggregate amount in the book fol
this wear was set down at 1881 eco, 600
and in the book for last year at only
S303, 100000. Mr.. Dawes stated tina
there was a misprint in one item, whereby
Il 81, 900, 600 had been converted into $l1,
O0O,000. Bat after making allowance
for this error Of S7,000,00O, there still
remained 1924, 100000 as the estimates
Of the present administration, agains
S303, ,0O0, 900 as the last estimates of tho
administration of Andrew johnson.
This certainly seemed to justify Mr.
Dawes charge; but an examination g
the items which make up these respective
aggregates showed that it ONLY seemed
50. 1t was feu.d that the S303, 900, ,00C
of last year did not include the estimated
expenditures of the Post Office Depart
ment, amounting to S24, $40, Alb, which
we're to b, submitted separately upor
page "a Of the esimate-book while tho
| 1924, 600, 900 Of the present year did in
clude the accounts OF that department, a.
mounting to S25, ,5Sl, ,093. 1t was eyi
dent, the.cl that before making COM
parison between the two estimates Of the
two administrations, the Post Office acc
Of last year must be added to the S303,
100000, making over S327, ,0OO, GOO, oil
else the Post Office account Of this yeal
must be subtracted from this years esti
mates, reducing them from 1924, 900, OO(
to less than S299, 100000. In the for
ner case the difference in favor of The
: present administration would be $4,000,
600, in the latter s4, ,000,090.
|, After making this correction, then, th'
comparison between the two estimates