Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1890-10-15
SINKING FUNDS AS A STATE ISSUE.

The question of the investment of sinking
before the public. On Monday the manage
ment of the sinking funds of this city was
brought up in the local courts, at nearly the
same time Mr.. Hensel introduced in his
| campaign arguments as an interesting
sequel to what has been already said about
the State deposits, almost exactly the same
issue with regard to the investment of the
funds of the State.
The basis of the argument with regard to
the city sinking funds-regardless of what
inspires it's that the money ought to be
invested IN interestbearing securities in
stead of lying idle In the banks. This argu-
ment is exactly that adopted by Mr. Hensel
with the additional backing that In its
application to the State funds that course is
required by the statute. The Law requires
that all the money in the sinking fund Of
the State, in excess of S500,00 must be
invested in securities either of the State or
of the United States Mr.. Hensel makes
this very pertinent issue in the campaign
by the practical assertion that in the man
agement of the State funds both the business
principle and the statutory requirement
have been ignored. In that connection he
states some facts that are equally pertinent
and we'll established.
When Governor Pattison became Gov
ernor in 1883, he found the amountof s., 1885,
o41 in the State sinking funds deposited in
various banks throughout the State. This
was a violation of the statute just referred
to, as to the whole of it in principle and as
10 s., 296, 600 so far as the letter of the law
was concerned. The fight which the Gov
ernor waged to force the investment of that
fund will be remembered by all whose MEN,
ories are not conveniently short. The result
of that conflict was that the money was used
in the purchase of bonds with gain to the
sinking fund of about $3.50, 900. The peril
nence of the issue is shown by the produc-
tion of figures indicating the money now de-
posted in various banks to be 81, 462, 1888.
OF this sum nearly 81, 600, 900 is held there
in violation of the statute. Under Pattison
the money in the sinking fund was never
allowed to exceed the legal limit of $500, 900.
The loss to the State by permitting the ex-
cess over that amount to remain with the
favored State repositories, is, at the rate in
dicated by the quotation on the per cent
State bonds, nearly $50, ,oOo per annum.
These fgnres may suggest to Mr.. Della
mater ard his organs the necessity of strictly
respecting the constitutional provision
concerning the management of the State
funds. II members of the Legislature are
permitted to enjoy the profits of State funds
deposited in their banks, they are not likely
to insist on the careful fulfllment of the
statutory requirement as to the investment
of the sinking funds. With regard to Mr..
Delamater, the records do not present any
evidence that ne called as member of the
Legislature for the investment of that part
of the sinking fund which was held in his
bank.
The agitation of this question bids fair to
be extremely beneficial from the unanimous
trend of opinion in the same direction. One
group OF Republican politicians are en-
phatically insisting that the city sinking
funds should be used for the purchase of
bonds The opposing group will be equally
prompt to agree that tine State funds should
be employed in the same manner, as
required by law. The fact that this con-
viction is borne in mind upon each side. most
powerfully as regards the funds controlled
by the other side, does not lessen the
significant harmony on both sides. With
this universal agreement that sinking funds
must be invested instead of being kept idle
in banks, we shall hope to see about
81, 900, 900 of public funds used for the pur-
chase of interest-bearing securities. with an
advantage to the public of from 500, 900 to
S12O, 600 annually.