The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1898-12-14
Josiah GrOut.
Comments on the Work of the Legislative
Investigating Committee.
To the people OF Vermont;

10 tUb DbODlb VI NSImOnb,
The report of the special committee to In
vestigate expenses of State officers and
States attorneys Is officially promulgated
and making, as 1t does, my expenses too
much by very considerable sum and leav-
ing certain matters, to say the least, I'M
finished, feel called upon to give all the
facts occasioning gubernatorial expenses
within the period covered by the investiRa-
ton, concerning which a distinction has
been made in the report between different
administrations In which similar acts &C.
Cured
The omission OF these facts from the re-
port having been presented to the atten-
ton OF several members OF the commltteei
including the chairman and correctlon Oh
the report in this respect requested, anu tne
Legislature having adjourned without max
ing such correction, am compelled, either
by silence to admit the report fair, or make
this statement:
The suggestions in this connection arise
from the Washington centennial in Cover
nor Dilliugham's period, and the Mckinley
Inauguration and dedication OF the Grant
monument in my period; on each OF which
occasions the guard was used as an escort
to the governor and under similar, II not
iden sical circumstances, in each case. The
particular point Is that the allowance to
the guard by me, amounting to S1,9O8, is
made by the report part OF my executive
expenses and the allowance to the guard by
Governor Dillingham; of So, 1872 is not made
part of his executive expenses nor does
the fact that the guard acted as his scort
in New York app, ar in the report. 1 also
wish to call attention to the fact that my
account is otherwise 1872 too large, made so
by evident errors in two items and that
Governor Dillingham; is $446 too small.
| also claim that the allowances to the
guard by both Gov. Dillingham; and myself
are not executive expenses and should be
treated the same in both instances.
Section AIT V. s., gives the governor
power to order each year three days parade
OF the guard, by regiment or company, at
such time and place, AZ he directs and sub
ject to such regulations as he prescribes.
Pursuant to this authorit, gave eight COM
panies a parade in New York OF two days
with allowance to correspond. Ii these
companies had been given parade in Yer
mont probably the committee would not
have thought OF making the cost an execu-
tive expense. The governor having right
to put the parade when and where he
pleased renders it as much militia ex-
pense in one place as another.
Then protest that the cost OF such pa
rade ia no more au executive expense than
was the cost of the Chester muster, which
was authorized by the same section OF law
and does not any more belong to my official
| expenses than the balance of what the mi
| lila cost the State in the year 1897.
In connection with the Washington CEN
tennial in 1882 Governor Dillingham; order
| ed a two days parade of the guard in New
York and 1t was there used rs his escort
| On account of this parade he allowed the
guard two days pay out OF the treasury,
amounting to 1912 l do not ella IN this
sum should be part OF his official expenses,
but that the fact belongs in The report and
that the amount belongs as much 10 his Off
cial expense account rs the 81, 9O8 does to
mine.
After stating the different items OF Cover
| nor Dillingham's expenses the report mas
81. toll anil. N
| the above functions Governor Dillingham;
| attended the centennial anniversary OF
| Washington's Inauguration in New York,
| and some other fficial functions within and
without the State without expense to the
| treasury" The committee could not have
| intended this statement, after having found
| an item of 1914 80 as The governors staH ex-
| penses in attending he centennial.
| The report makes the entire executive
expenses of Governor Dillingham; period
$1774.14; while the auditors report puts
them AZ shown in nv statement before
the committee at 81, 1872 81. In this last
| named sum there are two months and
| few days of Governor o msbee's expenses
which were $175 40. Deduct this sum and
| the amount r. mains at Sl,I9I 10. ALSO
three months and few days OF Governor
| Dillingham's expenses, amounting TO S423 :
| 70 went into Governor Pages period. Add
| this sum to the 81 797 IL above remaining
| and you lave So, 900 SO the exact sun total
| of Governor Dlllngham's executive ex-
penses, which sum is $44674 larger than
| given in the committees report. This dis
crepancy rests ent rely between the audi
tors and committees classiications and
| since 81 me of Governor DilliDgham's vouch-
ers are Tor salary and executive expense IN
| one gross sum the auditors had the best
chance to know how much was for salary
| and how much for expense.
Nothing need be said about the expenses
of the oiher governors, unless to say that
the total Of Governor Pages period as
| given in my statement to the committee,
after deducting the 1923 carried to Governor
| Dillingham's expenses, drops to the amount
| stated in the report.
1t is. however, fair to say that Governor
Page practically had no expense at the
| Bennington celebration, because 1t was
| in connection with the muster, and the
staff expenses were merged in the muster
account. Had he executed the function
outside the State, or not in connection With
the muster, a very considerable executive
expense would have been unavoidable.
Before the committee / gave my staff and
executive expenses except the N tshVlllt
trip at $l,06737, and my other executive
expenses ~ 81 044 60, both sums amounting
o 81, Ill 81, and to these items should bt
added S227 81, coming from two OF Gen
Peck's bills as nece5s airy expense, lnclden
tai TO the Washington and New York trips
making So $3.50 rs, to which amount adj
So 1863 rs as the sum total OF my executive
expenses and in no possible view of thu
case can they be made $7,253 53 as the re
port gives them.
The sum of $4,322.69 mentioned in the re
port as National Guard expense on the trip
TO New York and Washington and as
pending claim against the State, to cove
which House bill No. 345 WAS introduced
can have no possible relation 10 the execu
tive expenses Of my term and cannot se
why IL is mentioned in this connection, un
less intended as an intimatiOn that my OK
penses should be 81 ,56l %, which sum /
already seized upon by some OF the Stat
papers as the correct amount For what
, ever reason, however, this allusion ma
have found place in the report let 1t b
known that nothing can make the sum an
! larger; at this high water mark, innuend
and imagination are exhausted and Josa
, Grout az an expense maker is unavoidabl
, allowed rest.
However, treating militia expense a
official and applying to Gov. DllinghaI
the same rule, given by the committee 10
= me, yon must add to So 300, HIS actus
2 official expenses, the sum Of S3,lJ2, bein
J what he allowed the guard in New Yorl
. making SO 412 90 and also add the turtle
] sum of S3,6l900, the balance OF whole el
peuse after deduoting allowance to tn
a | puArd and Won have Sg03l. but this doe