The Portland daily press., 1878-08-09

Correspondent-Wer the S230000O0 which
Mr.. Hewitt claims to be "clear saving by
the Forty fourth Congress an actual saving, or
only postponement of appropriations, and a
failure to provide properly for the pubic ser
vice, sc?
Senator Windom-Some portion of it was
doubtless Saving" but by far the largest
part was not. On the 18th of August 1876, af-
ter carefully aualyzing every item on every
appropriation bill for that year, and comparing
each one with like items in the bills for the pre-
vious year, stated on the floor OF the Senate
that "of the total pretended reduction OF S40,-
600 600, not S5,000,000 could in any sense be
called a saving of money to the Treasury and
that this snm fell far below the retreuchment
effected by the preceding Republican Con-
gress. now repeat that statement, and am
prepared at any moment to prove it beyond
doubt.
The mere DISAPPOINTMENT of appropriations"
for public buildings which were under way in
1876. as compared with the proceeding year,
amounted to So, 2S6,593; the postponement of
surveys of public lands to $647 800; the failure
to appropriate money to pay judgments Of the
Court of Claims, SC. to $1.6l1,00 There
were numerous other items, amounting to
many millions of ike character, which % were
not deficiencies" but simply postpone
ments," which will come in at some future
time to swell the bills. The three items have
just named, amounting to SIS. 544, $685. were only
a small part Of such ''postponements" made 10
the one year 1876. Deducting this from Sill
100000, which is one-half of what Mr.. Hewitt
claims to be the total savings of the Forty
fourth Congress for 1876 and 1877, we have less
than S6,000,000 as the actual saving for that
year. There were many other items of reduc-
ton made in 1876, which are in no possible
sense a saving to the Treasury, but which If de-
Quoted from the 81, 100000 would wipe out
the whole of the pretended economy of which
SO much boasting has been done.
Correspondent-Does not the amount OF APP
preparations always indicate the exact cost OF
administering the government during the year
for which they are made?
Senator Wirdom-It does not. There are al
ways large unexpended balances from various
sources which come over from one year to an
other. These "unexpended balances after
standing two years subject to use are ''carried
to the surplus fund.-" which means they are
returned to the Treasury. 1t is, therefore, the
annual expenditures" rather than the "appr0-
priations" which show what it really costs to
carry on the government any given year.
The exception to this rule is when "deficieI-
cies' are created, which makes the "expendi-
lures s'of one year appear less than they really
are In such case the ''expendtures' of the
next or succeeding year will show proportion
ate increase. An instance Of this kind is found
in the apparently reduced expenditures of 1871,
which will be fully balanced by the increase of
1878 and 1879, when all the deficiencies are
charged up.
w u6U tu6 ILA6CuIlN6 DcpdIbututS arc EOutet
and faithful, only SO much money as is ueces-
sary will be used, and the balance of the appfo-
priations will bo returned to the Treasury. A
striking illustration of this is presented under
the last administration. From 1869 to 1876,
the amounts thus 'carried to the surplus fund,
as shown by an official Treasury statement,
were very large, exceeding by many millions
Der annum the amounts so returned to the
Treasury under late Democratic appropria-
tions. This proves two things: First, that a
mere comparison of Appropriations does not
show the relative cost of administering the
government; and second it proves that the hue
and cry of corruption and extravaganza raised
against the last administration was without
foundation.
You will see at once that their loud boasts Of
| economical reductions based upon the COM
parisons of mere Appropriations, without
taking into account the sums respectively
carried to the surplus Jfttnd' are absolutely
meaningless, or else a sham or fraud. These
facts may serve to explain how it is that with
all their empty vaporings about Diminishing
| the burdens of the people," they have hardly
| attempted to reduce taxation. From 1868 tt
| 1875 taxes were reduced by the Republican
| party by various bills, an aggregate of over
$3.50 100000 per annum, while during the
three years of Democratic domination in the
House of Representatives no bill reducing
taxes had passed that body except the reduc-
| ton of some eight cents Der pound on tobacco.
The reduction of expenditures by the Republi-
| cans meant decrease of taxes. The reduction
| of appropriations by the Democrats meant
| only deficiencies" and postponed national OBJ
legations