The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1889-01-17

advisable TO extend relief to that extent
to the collectors, and thus no risk would
be taken of impairing the ability of the
State to operate upon cash paying
basis; and when your honorable bodies
assembled, if it should be found that
there was still surplus by reason of
the tax rate being too high, you could
remit the overplus to the people, and
then more advisedly adjust the levy to
suit the requirements of the case, and
the only loss to be sustained by the
taxpayers would result from the loss of
the interest on the excess, if any, not
required for the current expenses OF
the government, which was too small
to each citizen to be deemed objection
able. In support of the advisability
of this suggestion attention was called
to the fact that certain bonds, here
after to be called to your attention,
would full due, and no sinking fund
had been created to meet them. If,
therefore, the existing tax rate was not
disturbed, we might safely calculate
upon the excess of receipts over dis
bursements to supply the government
with the necessary funds to meet its
obligations to these private credltorsi
and this would leave the remaining
surplus, less the amount RENTED to
the taxpayers, to be disposed of in pay
ment of existing deficiencies and for
such other meritorious purposes as
were commended to their Judgment.
And now, in view of the fact that
when you shall have provided for the
current expenses of the Reformatory,
if the estimates of the Comptroller are
adopted as basis for such appropri-
ations as you may make to run the
government, the expenditures and re-
ceipts will be about evenly balanced
on August 81, 1889. And when you
consider that, as the receipts derived
from taxation are not uniform during
the year, the great bulk of it reaching
the Treasury in December and January,
and for more than half the year the
expenditures exceed the receipts, max
ing it imperative to keep sufficient
surplus, or reserve, as margin to tide
the government over these months to
prevent a temporary embarrassment
and to enable the Treasury to meet all
lawful demands at maturity, requiring
for this purpose, in the opinion of the
Comptroller, at least $500, 900 to consti-
tute u safe margin, you can readily
appreciate that it creates an exigency
beset with difficulties, but no less de-
mands your serious attention.
And the inquiry which naturally sug-
gests itself is, how are we now to avert
the impending deficiency during the
coming fiscal years? Should you now
deem 1t advisable to restore the former
tax rate of % cents this might afford re-
lief for the year 1890, but as the govern
ment for 1889 has to be supported from
the taxes levied and collected in 1888
and now on hand, it is too late to seek
relief for this year from that source,
and IA it Is quite certain that it Will
require all the revenue accruing from
% cent levy to supply II sufficient
sum to support the government for
| 1890 with the increase in expenses
heretofore mentioned, it would be
inexpedient aud unwise to burden that
year with deficiency inherited from
| 1889.
In the first place, then, l respect
| fully submit, that it will be necessary
for you to scrutinize the expenditures
with great care, and while economy
does not suggest, or require, that you
should withhold the means necessary
to accomplish important objects, it is
my deliberate opinion that many OF
the appropriations asked for, and the
estimates presented for ordinary cur
rent expenses, upon which the Comp
troller bases his report, are in excess
of what they should be in the face Of
our present financial condition.
1t will be seen by comparison with
the appropriations made at the specia
session of the Twentieth Legislature
| that while some of the departments
and institutions ask for less, the aggre
gate demand is S371 $4,000 in excess o
previous appropriations.
A proper analysis, however, will dis
close the fact that part of this sun
is absolutely necessary to provide fol
the additional charitable and reforma
tory institutions and the Commission
of Appeals Court, not formerly EN-
braced in the appropriation bill.
In this connection it is worthy o
remark that while the executive
branch of the government, and many
If not all, of the penal and charitabl,
institutions seem from present inform
alton to have been kept strictly con
fined in their expenditures within thu
limit of the appropriations provided
and many have covered back into tn,
treasury uneXpended balances from
last year, the judicial department ha'
transcribed its appropriations, ant
the deficiency to be provided for II
payment of the fees of sheritls, clerks
attorneys, special judges, attached
witnesses, and justices and constable
in examining courts amount
to 1887 800. From this enor
nous increase in the cost of enforcin!
our criminal laws under the eXistin!
statutes, you may likely discover al
explanation of the probable strin
gency in our public finances, and i
may direct your efforts towards II rea
sonable retrenchment in this depart
ment of government as well IA TIN
others?
The amount OF fees in felony case
paid district attorneys, sheritfs ant
clerks in district courts 70
the year 1881 was Sis, 1865, anC
increased in 1882 to S404,
606.9S, then diminished in 1888 t
$3.50, S62.S3. But from that period tn
increased ratio has been uniforml.
rapid until it has reached the enor
nous sum in 1855 of 500, 5000. 1t i
needless to suggest, that any effort II
retrenchment and reform in this di