The Cecil Whig., 1870-10-29

endlng June ~ 1871, is, per capita, 81 .649
For the year ended June 80 1860, the ex-
penditures of the Government were $685.
O25, 7s9 "a, gold, the population being about
ii, 400, 600 per capita $2.007-showing a
proportionate expenditure of 1S per cent.
less in 1870 than in 1860 upon the same
basis, notwithstanding the increased area
OF the country, the interest on Pacific rail-
road bonds, and the organization of new
Territories.
AS to which statement the said Demo-
cratic Committee remarks as follows:
"The first false statement to be noticed
is the amount stated as the expenditure of
the fiscal year 1S59-'60: that is, from July
l, 1859, to June 30, 1860, which the Repub-
llcan Committee allege was $63, 025, 789 "a. -
To which we reply that the charge of
falsehood is untrue, and that the statement
of the Republican Committee is true, as we
proceed to show:
Quoting from tile Reuised Warrant State
naent Of the Treasury Department
Expended during the fiscal year ended
June 80, 1860:
War Department SIG, 400, 1877 10
Navy Department 11,513 $50 10
Indians and Pensions 1856, 696 50
Miscellaneous 27,969, $40 81
Interest 3,177,31 81
Total ordinary expenditures 63,025, 7S9 "a
precisely the sum stated by the Republican
Committee and taken from the most relia-
BILE source, the Treasury books. Thus one
more of the false statements of the Demo-
cratic Committee is exposed.
But the Democratic Committee finds
fault with this statement, simply because
the payments of interest on the public debt
are included. Of course the interest was
included. The time was a period of pro-
found peace; no war or war expenses to be
paid for, and, therefore, the annual interest
was just and proper charge as current
expenditure. But more than this, the
interest was and is included in the $685.
124, ,052 1S, which forms the basis of COM
parison of the Grant Administration, thus
showing the complete fairness of the Repub-
lican Committee, and putting the two
administrations upon precisely the same
basis for comparison.
Subsequently and to reduce the expendi-
lures of Grants Administration to peace
standard, the war interest was deduced
from Grants expenditure, not because it
was interest, but because, like the other
war expenses specified, it was and is prop
erly chargeable to the Democratic rebellion
and to the Democrats as being the only
rebels.
Now, if the Republican committee has
falsified or blundered to the extent of
So, 1894 G2 of interest, then the Demo-
cratic committee has falsfied or blundered
to the extent of 1877. 702, 33S O5 of interest
which is included in the current expendi-
lures under Grant-a blunder of falsehood
more t!Ian forty times as great as they
haS2 been ch ir.,cd to the Republican COM
;.iittee.
l.nt the pa' lie lu;I-e as to which commit
toe has lied II hlahaered, and let the
{fr!;:Horotic ,'a.auittee choose whichever
i5r4 of the d.!e:: III. suits them best.
Bat wi.at appears TO hurt this Demo-
gratiC .2s:inlt,ec lie worst is the charging
N'ek nrsn sl;eir party the expenses Incl
dent 10 wa, Il the extra expense of the
army caused b, Democratic opposition to
the reconstruction of the States upon a
loyal basis; but this is a pill which they
must swallow dose from which they
can find no hope of relief
The Democratic committee rises in wrath
and mendacity as it proceeds with the
review of Republican facts.
On page IL the Resident Democratic
Committee says:
"In 1S59-'GO are raised So, ,O25, 1877 "a
which is two dollars per head; in 1S69-'70
the Republicans raised SAL, ,225, ATT 63,
which is $40 % per head"
We have already shown what was done
with the sum raised by the Republicans,
$3.50, 372, 542 1S of which went to pay the
debt, interest, and expenses incident to the
Democratic rebellion, and we will there
fore contine our observations to the sum
which they say was raised by the Demo-
VIZ raica1S - baipr fba;r oxoof
words.
First note the fact that this Democratic
committee here adopt the precise figures of
the Republican committee, $63, ,025, 7S7 "a,
less Sc, probrbly a typographical error,
which they assert on page 8 to be false,
thus convicting themselves by their own
testimony. Of course the statement of the
Democratic committee on page or page 12
is false; it is false by their own admission,
and in fact, as stated by the Democratic
committee, it is false in both instances.
On page 8 the Democratic committee
asserts that $63, 025, 7S9 "a do not repre-
sent the current ordinary expenditures for
the fiscal year ended June 80, 1860. We
have shown above, from the books of the
Treasury, that that sum does truly repre-
sent those expenditures, and therefore that
the assertion of the Democratic committee
is false as to that statement.
Now on page 12, as qouted above, they
say "ne raised" $63, 025, 7S7 "a, leaving
the inference and basing their comparison
on the assumption that "they raised' no
more.
We have shown above that the ordinary
expenses paid by Buchanan for the year in
question: amounted to $63, ,025, 7S9 "a, and
the Treasury books show that he also paid
as follows during the same year:
Items on old debt $500 90
Texas creditors 6,563 3S
Public debt IA, 43O, $50 90
Trust-funds 9S,245 81
Total payments 1851, ,949 40
More than fourteen and one-half millions
of dollars in excess of the amount which
the Democrats say "we raised "a square
misrepresentation of more than fourteen
and one-half millions of dollars in single
year. No honest man will hereafter claim
that the statements of the Resident Demo-
cratic Committee are entitled to the least
confidence in any particular. They delib-
erately substitute false amounts or names
in every instance. There is no truth in
them.
The Democratic Resident Committee
next quote a table from the Republican
financial pamphlet, which gives the COM
parative receipts for internal taxes for fif-
teen months under johnson and for the
same length Of time under Grant.
To this table is appended, by the Demo-
cratic committee, the follwing pertinent
questions:
'Will this Republican committee please
inform US how this showing affects the
Democratic party?"
"But what had the Democrats to do with
the Internal Revenue Bureau?"
ANSWER.
Simply this, gentleman Democrats: The
whole system of internal taxation is a
Democratic institution, chargeable to the
Democratic party, and made necessary by
the Democratic rebellion.
The said Democratic committee next
devote page to a furious assault upon the
good old Commonwealth Of Massachusetts,,
which is just as appropriate in a pamphlet
upon the "National Finance" as was the
Democratic attack upon the soldiers of that
State in the streets of Baltimore in 1861 !;
is made in the same spirit, and will be at
tended with no great success.
We have now examined all the material
points raised in this famous Democratic
l,o ,kc ,,&I II,