New-York tribune., 1872-06-15
MR. DATES ON GOVERNMEET EXPENDI-

TURES
Mr.. Dawes has taken the responsibility OF
sending broadcast through the country rosy
comparison of the expenditures of the United
States Government in 1871 with those of 1850.
This statement is doubtless intended to serve
as a campaign document, since it purports TO
show that the cost of the National Government
under Gen. Grant has been less in proportion
TO population than that Of any Administration
since Van Buren's. The figures appear to have
been furnished from some official source, and
are intended strongly TO impress the unin-
structed reader with an idea of their fairness
and completeness, The process of cOmputa-
tion is as follows; Deduct from the total ex-
penditures of each class the expenditures direct
ly or indirectly growing out of the war, and
contrast the remainder with the total expendi-
lures in 1860. AS we intend, at no distant
day, to subject the financial record of Con-
gress and the Administration to careful in
vestigation, we shall content ourselves here
with stating one or two obvious criticisms OF
the methods by which the extraordinary
results promulgated by Mr. Dawes have been
obtained.
The salaries paid in the Treasury Depart
ment in 1871 are corrected for expenditures
"arising in consequence of the Rebellion" by
the simple process of subtracting the amounts
paid in 1860, and taking the entire remainder
as the additional expenditure caused by tho
Rebellion. This is exceedingly simple The
only objection to it is that it takes
for granted little more than tho
author sets out to prove. In the samo
way, the deduction to be made in the cost
of collecting the revenue from Customs, being
the extra sum which tho Administration was
necessarily required to expend in order to OBJ
tain the increased revenues set apart to
meet the interest on the Public Debt, is
arrived at>by subtracting the cost in 1860
from the Gosh in 1871. In the matter of pen
sons the process of correction is still moro
summary. The sum of $3,9j5,6S6 80, which
Buchanan's Administration paid out, is left
standing against him, while the whole item OF
$3t,4i3,S94 SO is struck out from the account
of Grant, "as it is not reasonable to suppose
"that many persons who would be entitled to
"the benefits of the old Pension laws are
"nOw livingw 1t certainly seems q little
hard to hold Buchanan responsible for the
war of 1912, the Indian wars, and the war
with Mexico. If pensions are to be deducted
from the cost of Government in 1871, they
ought also to be deducted from its cost III 1860.
In the same broad and effective way the whole
yearly interest on the public debt in 1860 is
charged against Buchanan, adding $S,17ISl6
to his account which does not belong there,
Buchanan having had no more to do with the
Mexican war loans than Grant did with those
of the Rebellion. 1t is not creditable to Mr.
Dawes that he should have taken any part In
the attempt to palm off on the country such
tissue of absurdities and falsehOods as those
he Incorporated in his report of the 4th instant
from the Conference Committee on the Tax
and Tariff bill. The fact is, that Grant and
his household do cost the nation trifie moro
than did the old bachelor, Buchanan.