Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1904-10-22
Quotes official Reports to Prove
The Charge Of Administration
Extravaganza.
TO GIVE BILL OF PARTICULARS
Democrats Have No Intention, He
Says, to Cut or Pensions
If Elected.

TAFT, In which the secretary called upon
the Democrats to give BIN Of partlcu-
lars In connection with their charge
that economy In government affairs bad
been forgotten IN the years the Republic
cans have been In control OF national
affairs
Judge Parker quoted a few totals
from official reports. which, he assert
ed not only raised the presumption Of
extravaganza but proved H. a bill OF
particulars will be given, he said, when
Democratic administration gets a
| chance az the books,
From midnight until after noon to-
| day rain fell iu torrents Streams
| overlooked, the roads were converted
| into brooks and made nearly impassa-
| Bile Tor pedestrians. Nevertheless, the
| New Jersey delegation formed pro-
| cesslon al the Esopus station of the
| West Shore railroad ana marched TO
Rosemount.
II had been the intention OF the or
gauizers Of the trip TO have two special
trains Of l6 coaches each and a party
Of 1000 persons The trains were to
leave Jersey city az 10 o'clock ana ar
rive at Esopus at noon
Al 10 o'clock rain was falling In
sheets AT Jersey city and few Demo
Gratis had arrived al the trains, An
hour later a delegation sufficient To- OIL
10 coaches had arrived and unmIndiul
Of the deluge determined 10 pay the
visit to the candidate despite the GER
tainty OF "a mud bath at the Esopls
end of their journey
Reaching Judge Parker's house, the
delegation surrounded the Veranda
Though the rainfall had ceased the
trees were dripping ana umbrellas had
10 be raised When Judge Parker
stepped from the house he was greeted
by cheers and handcapplng.
The New Jersey delegation was pre-
scented TO Judge Parker by Representa-
five Allen Benny Of Bayonne, who
made a short address. Judge Parser
said.
JUDGE PARKER's SPEECH.
oThe expenditures Of the government
say the administration. have been
managed I'm a spirit OF economy as far
removed from waste as from niggard-
illness. That expenditures have been
free from niggardiness cannot, think,
be successfully denied, hence II should
be and is frankly admitted,
"Wlth the claim that the eNpendl-
lures have been managed I'm a spirit OF
economy we must take issue The facts
presented in support Of the charge or
extravaganza have not been answered
FIGURES NOT DISPUTED.
,,,, .-4 ,hY ,,t,, eava,, rnara
ago and under a Democratic president |
the total expenditures Of TINS govern |
mont were less than 1855 100000 ana |
I'VE charged that in the last fiscal year |
the expenditures were over $5S2,OOO WJ |
The figures have not been denied, and |
they cannot be. Deducting from the |
latter amount the sum paid by this |
government for the Panama canal snd |
the Panama canal rights, we stu have |
1892 600 900. After making that deduc-
ton we find that It cost about $3.50. OO0,- |
900 more % run the government last |
year than Il did seven years ago. The /
statement on its face raises the pre-
sumption OF extravaganza and waste,
a presumption which requires evidence
10 overcome.
REGARDING PENSIONS.
"None has been presented. by way Of
indirect answer 10 the Democratic /
charge OF extravaganza the Inquiry has
been put by the administration Wheth-
or we propose 10 cut on the pensions.
We answer certainly not. And we fur
ther assert that the inference suggest
ed by the question Is not Ingenious, The
amount paid out in pensions has been
decreasing every year since 1898 But
for the unwarranted order No. rs
which was fully considered IN my let
ter OF acceptanCe-the amount paid for
pensions IN the seventh preceding year
would have exceeded the amount paid |
last year, As II was the difference
was only one and one-half millions OF
dollars. II is therefore necessary for
the administration to look IN other
directions than the disbursement for
pensions FOR the justification for the
excess Of expenditures OF last year
over that Of seven years ago or over
one hundred and siXty-six millions Of
dollars
WOULD REDUCE ARMY.
"The inquiry Is further made by the
administration whether we would dare
10 reduce the cost Of the army. We
answer that most assuredly we would,
and we ask the people 10 decide be-
tween the administration and the Dem
ocratc contention on that point. In
the year 1897 the war department cost
less than fOrty-nine millions OF dollars.
which was about the average cost per
year for the preceding 20 years. The
last year, a year of peace the cost Of
the army was one hundred and fifteen
million dollars. one Of the questions
we now ask the people Is: What Is the
use Of spending more than double on
the army now than we deemed wise to
spend previous to the Spanish war?
BIG ARMY UNNECESSARY.
"a large standing army was unneces.
sary then so our statesmen thought
and the result proved II Is alike un.
necessary now. unless mllltarlsn Is to
become a part OF our policy II we play
the role NJ the big policeman IN the
South American states, requiring each
10 act according 20 some administra.
tiou conception OF decency IN indus.
trial and political matters, and fur
Their require 10 TO Keep order and pay |
It's Obligations according 20 the stand
ard which may be set by each sue
rtcdlnk duIlluiHI dlou' anu IT, IN adj !
dltlon. the administration may az
pleasure see TO II that the states gov
ern themselves we'll and be prosper
Gus aud orderly according 20 the cr-
terion which may be set by each adj
ministration, then we should readily |
admit that we should have an army
costing one hundred and fifteen mill
lions OF dollars a year.
INTERFERENCE IN SOUTH AMER
ICA.
1--WE should further frankly conce1e
that the chances are that an attempt !
10 carry out such a policy win require
"A much larger army than we have now, !
and much greater expenditure ~ mon
ev than $4,000. 900 year But the peo-
Mo have not as yet approved the adj
-. .--LL-.. M. A.nLL.. ..LLn /