Eagle River review. [volume] (Eagle River, Wis.) 1890-1927, 1894-09-27

Every department. Of the state govern
ment. barring the secretary Of state
Office, has expended more money unde,
three years OF Democratic rule than wal
ever expended by the same department.
under three years Of Republican rule
ALI OF the state penal and charitable in
stituti0ns, such as the hospital
Tor the insane, the schools FOL
the deaf and blind, etc., have cos,
moro under Democratic than they eve,
cost under Republican ruls. The mem
bers OF the board Of control and regents
OF normal schools and other officers have
been allowed larger expense accounts
under Democratic than under Republi
can rule. 1t has been the same story
everywhere, in every branch Of the state
government. And expenses have con
tinued to increase yearly. Each sue
ceeding year since the pretended reform.
erS have been in power, expenses fol
Ike purposes have been increased.
Now, before present to You the
official figures Of expenses incurred re.
spectively by the Republican and Demo.
cratic administrations to substantiate
the statements which I have made,
wish to call attention to the qnfairnese
and mathematical jugglsry employed by
the Democrats to deceive the people. In
the first place they compare the state
tax levy Of this year, when owing to q
large and unusual income there is q
great amount of money on hand, and SO
only small tax is required. with the
tax levy of 1890, when there was no
money ON hand, and the usual tax levy
was necessary. This is simple trickery.
If they were disposed to be honest they
would have compared the taxes of the
four years Of Democratic rule with the
last four years of Republican rule.
This comparison they make is very
transparent fraud. But the most mon
strous effrontery is the pretension that
the money in the treasury has accnmu-
lated there as the result of Democratic
economy. 10 has come, not dollar Of
10, from reducing expenses, but from an
extraordinary income. The Democrats
have not by exercising economy, paid
out less money than did the Republic
cans, but from unusual sources they
have received more. This extra money
came from the ex-treasurers, $685., 900. So;
the refunding Of the direct war tax,
S80, 1856 10; the interest on deposits,
SAG, ga. 70; and increased receipts from
the railroads and other corporations,
1910, 900. The total of these unusual
amounts received in the last two years
is largely in excess Of the money now in
the treasury, $742, $50 CO. Had not these
extra amounts been received, the tax
levy for this year would have been fully
up TO the average for the past three
years of Democratic control, and much
larger than the average under the last
years of Republican rule.
The Democrats are not entitled to any
credit for this unusual income, except
for that received from the ex-treasurers.
But the receipt of this extra money has
nothing to do with the question Of econ
omy, which is the matter in contro.
versy.
Income has nothing to do with econ
omy. 70 is the expense account that
tells that story. Receipts may be large
or small, IL 10 the disbursements only
that economy affects. The Democrats,
instead of sho wing how and where they
have reduced expenses, point to the
money on hand as evidence that they
have done 90. On that theory man
who earns but $500 year and is obliged
to spend il all is extravaganza, because he
saves nothing, while the man who earns
S5 900. and perhaps spends "a 900 Of it
is economical, because he has something
left. The contention Of the Democrats
that because they have money on hand
they must have been economical, would
seem to be too absurd to deceive any
body, and yet their papers and speakers
are loudly insisting that the money in
the treasury is conclusive evidence Of
their economy. The true aad only test
as to which OF the parties has been the
most economical, is to compare the ex'
penses, for similar purposes, incurred by
each party during . series OF years.
This will Enthusiastically decide the ques-
ton upon it's merits. For this purpose ]
submit q series of comparisons The
figures are official, being all taken from
the reports of the See. Of State. There
are but three years in which compare
SONS can be made, as the accounts for
the present year are NOT yet made up
in the Secrctary's office. compare the
three years OF Democratic rule, 1922 3,
with she last three years Of Republican
rule, 1888 9 90. ! take the leading items
from the general fund, such as the ex-
pensas of the state institutions, clerk
hire, labor about Capitol, transient
labor, incidental expenses, etc. The ex.
penses for the different offices in the
capitol cannet be given for 1893 az they
were not published by the Secretary that
year, but the aggregates outside OF the
stated salaries, will be found under tie
heads Of s'clerk hire" and other ex-
pense accounts that are given. A refer
ence to the reports Of the Secretary for
the years 1912. the first two years Of
Democratic ECONOMY" will show that
the expenses were greater than under
the last two Republican years, In all the
state offices except the Secretal 3,
Oae OF the greatest sources CT expenses
to the state, and where the greatest
opportunity is afforded Tor the
employment Of economy, 10 in the main
tenanCe Of the state penal and Charita'
Bile institutions. Here are the figures