The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1875-07-30
Forcing Figures to Lie.

1t often happens that an adept in the art
OF deception can so tell part of the truth as
to give very different meaning from that
which the whole statement conveys None
are more skillful in that direction than our
neighbor, the argus. 1t has practiced it for
years. 1t knows just where TO stop in a
statement of another to make the author say
what he does not mean. This is the case in
most the figures it produced relative to the
national finances. For instance, yesterday,
it states, that by the report of the Secretary
of the Treasury the principal of the national
debt at the close of the fiscal year ending
June 80, 1873, was S2,224 4S2, ,993. 20, and for
the year ending June 80, 1874, it was s., ,251,-
800, ,469.43. Now that is true, literally, so far
as it goes, but our neighbor, in order to show
that the principal of the national debt has
been increased ST, ,207, AIS. %, failed to give
the note following the Statement of the re-
demption and issues of loans," tables ac-
on page g. which says:
1t will be seen that the increase of the principal Of
the public debt as shown by this statement appears
to be $7 20i Congress- by act of June g. 1872
provided that national banking associations might
deposit United States legal tender notes in the Treas
ury of the United States and receive therefor cert
Gates of deposit bearing no interest aud that the
notes so deposited should be set apart and held as
special deposit for the redemption said certificates
The certificates outstanding on the first day of July
Qs7and included in the outstanding principal of the
debt amounted to 100000 and the notes held as
a1 fnrf fba;rr
the cash balance in the Treasury on that day. 1t
will be seen therefore, that while these certificates
matter of accounts are treated as part of the
public debt, they do not in reality form any portion
ofi in the usual sense of the word, for the reason
that no revenue is required to be provided tor their
payments the notes which they represent always be-
ing in the Treasury special deposit for their re-
demption and these notes being included in the out
standing legal tender notes. Omittng these certif-
Gates as off set by the notes held deposit for their
redemption, the ACTUAL REDUCTION OF THE PRIN-
cIPAL OF THE DEBT WAS $4i,552, ,54.7 77p'
On page 8 accompanying tables) of the
same report-the one from which our neigh
bor probably took his figures, tine amounts of
the principal of the public debt are ''starred"
to call attention to note of explanation di-
rectly below them, which in turn refers to
the note just quoted above.
If our neighbor had cared to ascertain the
facts about the increase of the amount paid
for interest the fiscal year ending June 80,
1874, he would have found ON page of Sec
retary Brstow's report, the following in his
statement of the reduction of the national
debt during the fiscal year ending June 80,
1874:
Interest due and unpaid and accrued
interest (July 1, 1S73) S42 1866 80
Interest due and unpaid and accrued
interest July l, 1874 S3S, ,939,0S7 At
This shows that the amount of interest
overdue was reduced during the year $3,417,
565.35; or, in other words, that SO, All ,565. 35
of the interest which had accrued in previous
years was paid in 1894 which, added to the
amount paid for interest in 1928 makes
more than the $107, 19,S15.21, which tor the
past week the argus has kept standing be-
fore its readers as conundrum.
To conclude, we may state that Secretary
Bristow. in note so connected with the fig
ures which the argus quotes that the ordina-
ry reader could not have escaped noticing it,
S"yo ohAo otO cuuCttON " tEG pTtUCtpUC
Of the public debt was $41, $50, ,524.77" dur
ing the fiscal year ending June 30, 1874. The
argus. however, gives no heed to this de-
ciaration and explanation of Mr.. Bristow, but
declares from day to day that the principal of
the public debt was increased $17, POI, ,475.23
during that year. We predict that the Argus
will adhere to that statement, that it will re-
iterate it aud in other ways undertake to de-
ceive its readers as to the real condition of
the national finances. We do not ask if this
is honest or fair, but simply is it decent par
tisan journalism? Is it even serviceable or
gan-grinding? Nevertheless it is on keep
ing with the evident policy of the Democratic
journals in the state, as may be noted from
the infamous lies about the Agricultural Col
lege scrip, so boldly told and so brazenly re-
peated.
But why enumerate; the whole stock in
trade of the Democratic press of Maine, with
one or two exceptions, is falsifcation and de-
traction. 1t has been so for years, and to-
day the majority of the Democratic journals
are as reckless in their statements as when