New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-07-11
CENSUS BULLETIN NO. 80.
MIR. PORTER DEFENDS HIS STATEMENT OF
NETWORKS EXPENSES.

TIE FIGURES ARE ALL FROM CONTROLLER
MYERS REPORT EXTRAORDINARY Elk
PENsEs WERE DEDUCTED-ASY ERRORS
MUST BIZ IN CLASSIFICATION ONLY.
,sr TELEGRAPH 10 rkBUNn.'
Washington, July 10.-Mr. Porter. superintendent oi
the Census has this day sent the following letter 10
Controller Myers regard to the charges made BY that
official that Bulletin 81 concerning The expenditures Oh
certain cities contained erroneous statements in re-
gard TO the financial transactions OF New York CITY
Department Of the Interior. Census Office.
Washington, July 10, 1851.
Sir: Referring TO your letter Of the ot Instant, con
corning bulletin No 80, have 70 inform you ul&t inc
records OF this office show that tho letter OF April as
to which you refer, was sent YOU a1d mat no return
OF has been through the DEAD Letbor once
/ alsO Informed tndt " aid your once III uhaef.
standing the computation PERSONAL igt@r wac oon'
Eceper OF your ONCE, inolosing statement showing
IL dctalI how the classification was arrived ut Ihis
session Jarrett, 10 whom II was sent
~ referring 70 thesc statements yoa Gaye me.
that the balances on nand at the beginning vi the
year are til, same in the bulletin as tho,c reported
by you The several items Of eNpcnd lures were c!asl
ned By this once from your printed report, ard /
have yet 10 learn that You object 70 tue casscatoli
mcnt, but VIII be pleased have yon point ont any
error OF this Kind you may have discovered as you
can easily do from tho data lurnsh;d Mr LaFrctt,
Ii any error exists. only the classification can
be changed without changing the balances In your
DO. in preparing the statement for the bulletin,
the amount OF ali the Expenditures Of city for the
yCor, except those for tho redemption OF pubic dcD and
FOR purpose OF Investment securities, were denomlnacd
ordinary expenditures, for tn want OF any better
term to daine them. There can possibly DO no mis-
unders landing TO the meaning Oh the term a. used
In the bulletin, the Igurcs showing Tor tbemeiVes
what they are. ,
the amount for certain items Of the classification. be
lievcd 10 be extraordinary. thai is not necessarily
connected with the current expenses OF the Guy, was
deducted, and the remainder treated Approximate
ninstTatiyc expenditures, fllIy explained In the
fewer items Of ths classification should have bcen
deducted, arrive at the object sought, but that 1t
purely matter Of opinion The bulletin states pre-
Your city was, however. treated as were all tho
other cities and with no purposs but tat a. eianaE
expenditures for the construction OF new buildings
new streets the EXPENSE of water works etc II is
he rectcd however that but few IL any Of the cities
in question could did report slch expenditures
separately from expenditures Incurred In maintaining
those already In use. which matter IS fully stated In
the text OF the bulletin and especial mention Is also
therein made that, IN your city and few Others, e1
heavy for the year reported, which all this Office
could do in the matter. Could expenditures OF Uh,
character have been ascerianed this Office would
gladly have deducted the amount from the ordinary eN-
pendtureS as giving more nearly the administrative
expenditures of the several cities but as II was I'M
practicable to ascertain such amounts, the approAm
ton OF administrative expenditures was carried no
further than shown by the figures of the bulletin.
which are believed 10 be exactly what they purp0rt
yet having pointed out an error therein nor
is probable that OF any consequence can exist
as In every case the figures agree with the reports
from which they were taken; and any error. If any
there be. must. therefore, be in the classification nor
I'm the total amount, and would not affect the final
results.
ported TO have been made by you in ew-Iork
paper IN which You state that II would be interesting
to uncover the occult reason for charging Sew- 9ih
City with the expense Of the county, which other cities
mentioned In the table are not made TO bear. The
reason why the county expenditures were included
with those Of your city Is because Mr.. Barrett gen
era b0Okkeeper Of your office in letter % me. dated
December Il. 1880, states that the city and county
Of New York are one body corporate 9nG polite by
the same name and all statistics relating 90 or
the other since May l. 1874 identical; and your
own report confirms this statement. Very respect
fully ROBERT p. PORTER
superintendent of Census.