The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-03-14
PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND PUBLIC
FUNDS.

A friend has handed the Journal. "by re-
quest" and for its edifcation, an article
from a manufacturers trade paper, pub
lished in st. Louis. on the cost of govern
ment and the alleged extravaganza of adj
ministration. The article contains many
sweeping statements, as, for example: THE
opinion is common, it is almost universal
belief that our public officers, with rare ex-
ception, do not comply with their oaths of
office" If this opinion is common it does
public officials injustice and is unwar-
ranted reflection on the honesty of Ameri-
can citizens generally. That some public
officials prove unworthy and untruthful is
true. but they are the rare exceptions rath-
er than the rule. BY far the greater num-
Der, an overwhelming majority, of public
officials in all our governments. national.
endeavor to discharge their duties with
scrupulous fidelity. Proceeding in the same
vein the article referred to says:
1t is an open secret that in many of the
public offices of this city, of this State, of
this country. Ii costs more In salaries 10 DIS
tribute the revenue than the sum distributed
aggregates: that is, the amount .appropri-
ated TO have public work done is often spent
more in salaries TO have the work done
man il costs 10 do the work. These are ex-
treme charges to allege against the office
holders of this municipality or TINS state
a-itf of this country. But il is generally be-
Leved, and I'm many instances can be
proven, that more than 20 per cent. of the
actual revenues in the different departments
of the government Is diverted from the real
purposes for which 1t is intended
Such assertions as this prove nothing but
a. ;e~,o-o,,,o % tt,n Dareon vool-io,, thena
at least so far as the national and state
governments are concerned. a st. Louis pa
per ought to be able to speak for that city,
but the statement is probably as wide of the
truth there as elsewhere. AS far as the ma
tionai government is concerned. the state
ment that 1T costs more To distribute the
revenue than the sum distributed aggre-
gates.'' is absurd. The last report OF the
Bureau of Statistics of the Treasury De-
partment contains a statement showing the
expense OF collecting the revenue of the
United States. customs and internal reve-
nue.. each year from 1865 TO 1898. From this
statement Il appears that the cost Of col
lecting the customs revenue in 1868 was
g5-1Oo per cent. In 1895 IL was 1900
per cent. In the intervening years
IL varied from 99-1Oo per cent. to 15-loo.
the average cost for the thirty years being
less than per cent. The cost OF collecting
the internal revenue was $500 per cent.
in 1863 and 17-1O0 per cent. in 1SsS. In the
intervening years il ranged from 1-lOO per
cent to 90-1O0 the average cost for thirty
years being about Sl5 per cent. During the
ten years from 1SSs to 1895 the cost OF col
lecting the internal revenue varied from
2 l-1OO per cent to 92-lOO. in no year reach
ing per cent. During the fiscal year 1891
the government collected In customs reve-
nues $l76,554 .l26. AS to the cost of collecting
this vast sum. the secretary OF the treasury,
IN his last report. said:
For the expenses OF collecting the reye-
nues from customs there Is available the
sum of S5.5D0Oo0 per annum in addition 10
such sums may be received from fines,
penalties and forfeitures connected with
customs, and from fees paid into the treas
ury by customs officers" The total re-