The Evening critic., 1882-05-23
"Legitimafe Expenses.v

Mr. II. II. Shufeldt of Chicago, president
of the United States Distillers' and Liquor
Dealers Association, in letter to G.. G.
Wharton, the attorney Of the association,
dated at Chicago, May 10, 1882, admits the
raising of 100000 by the association, and
says "even with this we found ourselves
short"
"But," says he, mot dollar of it was
ever expended on legislation, except legiti-
mate expenses"
And Whisky Jim, in his able speech, cer
titled to the truth of Mr.. Shufeldts asser-
tion.
So far the whole thing is perfectly inno-
cent. The trouble does not begin until
definition of Legitimate expenses" is
called for. We have searched the entire
literature of the Whisky Ring in vain for
such definition. We know that the Ring
is reaching for subsidy of $6O,OOO,OOo.
We know that its members and expectant
benefciaries raised fund of 100000. We
know that this fund was used to promote
the accomplishment of the scheme.
But we are told by the men who dis
bursed the money that it was applied to
defray Legitimate expenses" only. And
Whisky Jim himself certifes thereto.
So, you see, reason the case as you may,
you come right back to the same point
every time-which is the still unsolved
question: What do the Ring and their
Senatorial advocate understand by the
term, Legitimate expenses?"
AS they are all my steriously silent on
this point, however, the duty of definition
will probably devolve on the committee
appointed to investigate, and more partic-
ularly upon Senator Window. Possibly
that which the Ring and Whisky Jim de-
scribe as Legitimate expenses" may turn
out to be synonymous with that which
Cakes Ames used to "place where it would
do the most good" or to which the late Bill
Kemble was in the habit of applying the
mathematical rules of Addition, Division
and Silence"
The known fexibility of the vernacular
admits of all these interpretations, so long
as the Ring and its attorneys are allowed
to control the dictionary. Or, if we adopt
the idea Of cipher, it easily appears that
the Ring and Whisky Jim may have em-
ployed the innocuous words Legitimate
expenses" to signify to those in possession
of the key the substance known to the
Democratic managers in 1876 as Copen-
hagen"
In any event the mysterious use of the
terms Legitimate expenses in the corre-
spondence of Shufeldt and the Senatorial
speech Of Whisky Jim raises an interesting
question in philology which we earnestly
hope will not be Iermittei to pass without
elucidation.
We should, perhaps, add that failing to
IND accurate information in the correspond
ence OF shufeldt or the Senatorial speech of
Whisky jim, we turned to those pages of
the Record embodying the brief but event
full proceedings in the House when the
bill was being jammed through under sus-
pension of the rules. We critically ex-
amined all the utterances that constituted
this brief debate, even including the
somewhat remarkable rulings of the
Speaker, but in vain. The subject of ex-
penses" was not even mentioned In tho
House. In fact, there is not line o. q
syllable in the House proceedings to indi-
cate that any of the statesmen who as
sisted In the operation of enema by which
the bill was passed knew that 100000 .hat
been raised by the Ring.
Our especial attention wa attracted tC
the profound ignorance displayed by thu
Hon. John g. Carlisle, commonly known a
"Honest john" upon this momentous sub
ject. And yet the admission of Mir. shu
feldt shows that the money had beeE raise