The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1900-09-20
THE SOLDIER ON THE WORK
INGMAN'S BACK.

principle OF imperialism which the Re-
publican campaign managers would
have the people believe is exalted pa
triotlsm. The Republicans have recog-
nlzed the fact that they would be called
upon to defend themselves against the
charge of attempting to transplant to
American soil the institution which is
the curse Of civilized Europe and has
driven thousands Of her inhabitants to
these shores General Henderson
made some comparisons of army fig
ures Of European countries with the
army figures of this country in a re-
cent speech at West Point. But his
representations we're not quite so frank
as they should have been, and the Bal
timore Sum- in recent editorial utter
ance calls attention to some things
The Sun says:
II was Carl Schurz, we believe, who,
deprecating the twin evils of imperial
ism and militarism, said that he hoped
never to see the day when in this coun-
try, as in Europe, every wage Garner
would be compelled to carry soldier
on his back How steadily we are ap-
| preaching the realization of that state
of things which Mr.. Schurz dreaded as
| one of the eventualities likely to result
from Mr.. McKinley's policy of "crimi-
/ nal aggression" some figures recently
| published, taken from official sources,
tend to show. Attention has been call
/ pd 70 ha Ct,Ii hN
cred by General Henderson as grad
uation day orator at the military acad-
emy at West Point, and which, it is
stated, is now being circulated by the
Republican literary bureau as a cam
| paign document to show that the mill
tary burden borne by the American
! people is tri1ing compared with that
borne by the down trodden and op-
| pressed subjects of the "effete mon
arches" of Europe.
For this purpose General Manderson
had prepared and appended to his ad-
| dress tables showing the number Of
men in the army of each country, and
| its proportion to populations; the area
! Of each country and the ratio Of SOL
diers to the square mile, or of square
miles to the soldier. We all know that
compared with most countries of Eu-
rope our country is of vast extent.
and that our army as compared with
the standing armies of Russia, Ger
many and France, is small. But when
we come to the question of comparative
cost, General Manderson's figures will
be found to be very misleading and
suggestive of want of candor which
is, to say the least, disappointing on
the part of a man who is an ex-senator
| OF the United States and president OF
the American Bar association. A topic
is given by him showing the popula-
| ton, the war budget and the cost per
capita Of the military establishment of
the principal countries, in which the
United States Is credited with an an
nual expenditure of S51 ,093, ,927, a pop
ulation of 75,00O,0O0 and a ratio per
capita of 6S cents as compared with
Frances per capita Of 1920, based upon.
budget Of s123,517 ,6S1 and a popula-
tion OF 3S,517,905 Germanys per cap
ita Of $2.70, based upon a budget Of
$141, 1,175, $50 and a pouation Of 81, ,270,-
900, and Great Britain's per capita Of
$2.32, based upon a budget Of $SS 49,
$50 and population of 37,SSS, ,439. Suf-
flee 1t to say that, according to General
Manderson's figures, the United States
shows the smallest budget of any coun-
try except Italy and Turkey, and the
least rate Of expenditure per capita
OF any country except Turkey. So
much for General Manderson's figures.
Unfortunately for the fairness of the
comparison which he Institutes and the
correctness of his conclusions, a critic
points out that upon the face Of his
tables 1t appears that his figures as to
other countries are taken for the years
1897 and 1898, those for the United
States for the year 1896, under a
Democratic administration and be-
fore the advent Of McKinleyism and
imperialism. Moreover, in 1896 the ac-
tual cost of the army was S23, 3,252, sos
the rest Of General Mandersons esti.
mate of s57,093,92 representing river
and harbor and other non-military ex.
penditures. If he had really wished
as he professed, to bring figures "dowr
to the very latest date possible" Gen,
eral Henderson would have given the
actual army appropriation for 1901
which is STA ,220 ,09555, which is near
ly five times as great as it was undel
Democratic administration and before
Mckinley embarked upon his career o
blood and conquest. If we add to thi
, appropriation other items which ar,
: usually included in European war bud
= gets, but excluded from General Man
derson's computation-the militar!
academy, $685., 3,5S967; Notifications
1888 ,62S, and pensions, $145, ,245, $50
we shall have a grand total of s267,
502, ,543.22 of current expenditures. Thi
, is an amount, as a contemporary put
= it, nearly double the burden carrie,
by Russia or Germany, more than dou
BILE that of France, three times that o
Austria or Great Britain, six time
; that under which Italy is staggering
= and thirteen times the load that |