The true northerner. [volume] (Paw Paw, Mich.) 1855-1920, 1896-06-10
RIVERS And HARB0RS.
Opinion of the Merits and De-
merits of the Bill.
AS TO ITS POLITICAL ASPECTS.
Defects of the system-An Honest Differ
ence OF Opinion as 10 Some of the Ex-
penditure-The Annual Dedcit-Common
Sense View of the Case.

WASHINGTON, June Especial. Now
that the river and harbor bill has become
law by virtue of two-thirds vote in each
house of congress 10 pass IL over the veto
perhaps il would be instructive TO give
what might be called the expert or inside
opinion in Washington as 20 the merits and
dement's of the law This am able to do
upon pretty accurate information and GER
tainly without any prejudice one way or
the other. II must be admitted at the out
set that the method by which these impor.
tant appropriations are made In this coun-
try Is a bad one. We have here altogether
too much government by parliament.
Abroad such matters as river and harbor
improvements are placed altogether in the
hands of expert boards, and the money is
appropriated in a lump. All the details are
fixed by the experts, and the parliament
does not concern itself with them Here
congress insists upon doing everything.
down to the smallest detail. The inevitable
result is that many OF these appropriations
are made for political purposes 10 help this
congressman or that secure reelection in
his state or district. Everybody demands
a share of the "pork, and the river and
harbor committees are shrewd enough TO
distribute their favors in such way as 70
command votes enough not only TO pass
the bill in the first instance, but to carry Il
over the presidents veto should that be.
come necessary This is known as the "log
rolling" or "help your neighbor" method
Of securing appropriations
Evils of the Log Rolling System.
1t is true the army engineers are sup
posed TO serve as a board Of experts in these
matters These engineers are for the most
part able and honest men, but they know
very well their recommendations are likely
to be overridden by congress. The national
lawmakers finally take all responsibility
off the shoulders of the engineers, and this
operates to strike down professional pride
and zeal.
Notwithstanding the evils of the system,
which has grown up just as other things
have grown up in our government without
any one in particular being responsible for
IL, the new river and harbor law is not a
steal. 1t is not robbery. 1t is not even
extravagant. The wonder is, under such a
system, that il is not a worse bill / have
talked with army engineers, with mem
bers of the committees and with many
public men about the items in the law,
and this seems TO be the fact:
OF a total authorized expenditure of
S72 10000 50, 000 600 or SO, 900, coo is for
purposes which are open TO criticism, being
designed for works which are not impor-
tant TO commerce or TO the people in any
way. AS TO some Of these items, aggregat.
ing $4,000, 900 or SO, 200, 600, there is an
honest difference of opinion and others
are clearly products Of the political and log
rolling system which controls this feature
of our government operations. But as
10 the remainder, the great bulk of the
authorized expenditures, IL is beyond crit
icism. devoted TO works of great impor-
lance The question. therefore. is a simple
one. Shall the wheels of progress he stopped
because some of the items in the law are
for works of doubtful value?
Future Expenditure.
Though the total amount involved Is
more than $40, 600 600. less than $l3,
600 is made Immediately available and
this amount Is for two years operations
as congress makes no appropriations for
rivers and harbors at its short session. The
remainder is TO be spent during a long
series of years by the contract system
which is economical, rational and bust
nesslike. The only sensible way 10 carry
on these great works Is TO let contracts for
the whole operation and 10 keep them go.
ing From 20 to AS per cent saving over
the old method is proved by actual expert
ence.
The argument is generally made that
the government cannot now afford such
large expenditures because the treasury in
come Is not equal To the outgo. If you
listen TO the party men, one side will
tell you one thing about this and the other
side another. Those who are seeking the
truth generally have 10 look elsewhere than
TO the politicians for il. The facts, as
they appear to me, are these:
How We Are Running In Debt.
The annual deficit, as matters are now
going, is something like so, 900. 600 a
year But it being the policy of the gov
eminent as at present administered to keep
up the gold reserve by selling bonds for
gold, and all the money thus borrowed be-
ing covered into the treasury as available
assets. the deficit of reserve is more than
overcome by the sums thus accrued In
three years the government has borrowed
nearly S400, 000, 000 but there is now In the
treasury available money to the amount of
something like S275, 600. 000 Doubtless
there will be more Withdrawals of gold, but
no matter how much of the yellow metal
goes out other money has TO be put in its
place. The diminution of the reserve does
not diminisl the amount of money in the
treasury, but If the reserve continues TO
dwindle another sale of bonds for gold will
become necessary. and the available assets
of the treasury will be increased by that
much.
The comparatively small annual deficit
Is thus easily overcome by the method EN-
ployed to keep up the gold reserve There.
fore the question is very simple one-aft-
er the money is in the treasury are you go.
ing to let 1t lie there idle doing no good to
any one, or is ii TO be put In circulation
among the people for legitimate internal
improvements
No matter what the politicians say, this
is the common sense view of the case Ii
the gold reserve is TO be kept up, we have
TO buy gold TO do IL with. After getting the
money shall 1t be permitted TO lie stagnant
as an unnecessarily large surplus, or shall
1t be employees WALTER WELLMAN.