The Portland daily press., 1884-09-02
Keep "the Rascals Out

A very important document obtained from
the Treasury Department by the Hon. Ed
ward Mcpherson deserves more attention
than it has yet received. 1t is a mass of fig
ures for which unfortunately few newspa-
pers can find space, bat which ought to be
in the hands of every speaker or active man
ager 10 the Republican party during this
campaign. 1t contrasts the receipts of the
Government under different administrations
from its earliest organization to the present
time, and Its disbursements ia like manner,
with exact statements of all losses sustained
by the Government, either in receipts OF In
disbursements, through any neglect or mis-
conduct or misfortune OF its officials. The
receipts include those from all sources
and are classified from customs, from post
offices and from all other sources. The dis
bursements are not classified IN detail, as
this is impossible. That part of the docu-
ment which will convey to the public mind
most instructive lesson Is a comparison of
ratios Of the loss at different periods to the
receipts and disbursements during the same
periods.
The aggregate loss on each 81 900 received
and discussed was greatest under the Ad
ministration OF Martin Van Buren,. 1t then
averaged S11 II. 1t has been least under
the Administration of Chester A. Arthur,
having averaged for two years only 10 cents
on 100000. MonIoe's eight years rank IN
proportion of losses next to Van Buren's;
then follow Andrew Jaekson's eight years.
and next the four years under Harrison and
Tyler. These were exceptional, but prior TO
the expulsion of the Democratic party from
power in 1861, there had been no admins
tration of that party under which the rattle
of losses to receipts and disbursements was
less than $3.50 or 81 900 It was 1881 un-
der Buchanan, $4.06 under Polk, and it is
also noticeable that from the accession of
the Democratic party to power, when Tyler
abandoned those who had elected him, the
ratio of losses had varied but little, exceed
ing $500 at all times on $1,000 collected
and disbursed.
But under Lincoln, Notwithstanding the
extravaganza of the war, and the extraordi-
nary chances for peculation which were then
afforded, the ratio of losses fell to 70 cents:
under Andrew johnson to 81 cents; under
General Grant tor eight years to only "A
cents on each 81 900; under Rutherford B.
Hayes to 8 cents on $4,000, and under Pres
ident Arthur to IS cents on 100000
1t is not possible to conceive of test more
rigorous and thorough than this of the f.
deity and efficiency of administration in all
It's departments. In every branch of public
service, it will be observed, the same aston
ishing improvement is demons trated. In
thO lONCAPbo AAOLu SuabOu1o3 TIC kOoouo uuucI
Buchanan were less than one-sixteenth Of
the losses under Tyler, but they were more
than double the losses under Lincoln, and
from 81 cents on $1,000 under Buchanan,
the loss dropped 10 cents under Grant,
cents under Hayes, and Z mills under Ar
thur. In like manner the ratio of losses to
disbursements for war, navy, pensions and
Indian purposes fell from 50. II on 81, 900 I'M
der Buchanan TO S1.79 under Lincoln; to 90
cents under Grant, mills under Hayes and
Z mills under Arthur. IL may be said with
truth, therefore, that in every branch Of the
public service, without exception, there 10
conclusive proof of greater economy, fidelity
and efficiency at this time than has ever be-
fore been seen under any administration
from that of George Washington to this day.
The Democrats who are bowling for aehange
will not dare to present these facts to the
people. The rascals who are proposing to
turn the rascals out' will not dare to ad-
NIT that their particular objection to the
present government is that they do not have
chance to steal public money.