The Saint Paul globe., 1904-10-22
PARKER CONSIDERS
GOVERNMENT COST
Continued From First Page

Continued From First Page
think, be successfully denied-hence it
was and IS frankly admitted. With the
claim that the expenditures have been
managed in a spirit Of economy we must
take Issue. The facts presented in sup
port of the charge of extrayagance have
rot been answered.
Administrations Compared
We asserted that only seven years ago
total expenses of this government were
less than 1865 ,000, 900, and we charged
that in the last fiscal year the expenditures
We're over $582 100000 These figures
have not been denied and they cannot
be. Deducting from the latter amount
the sum paid by this government for the
Panama canal and the Panama canal
rights, we still have $5S2, 100000. After
making that deduction we find that5it cost
about s166. 100000 more to run the govern
ment last year than it did seven years
ago. That statement on its face raises
the presumption of extravaganza and
waste, a presumption which requires eyi-
dence to overcome. None has been pre-
sented.
By way of indirect answer to the Dem
ocratic charge of extravagance, the in
qulry mas been put by the administration
whether we propose to cut off the pen
sions. We answer, certainly not. And we
further assert that the inference suggested
by the question IS not ingenious The
amount paid cut in pensions has been de-
creasing every year since 1898. But for
the unwarranted order No. Is, the
amount paid for pensions in the seven
preceding years would have exceeded the
amount paid last year. AS it was the
difference was over 81, 500, 600. It is there
fore necessary for the administration to
look in other directions than the dis
bursement for pensions for the justifica-
ton Of the excess of expenditures of last
$166, 000,0
Cost of the Army
The inquiry is further made by the ad-
ministration whether we would dare to
| reduce the cost of the army. We answer
that most assuredly we would, and we
ask the people to decide between the adj
mlnlstratIon and the Democratic conten-
ton on that point. In the year 1897 the
war department cost less than $49, 600, 600
! which was about the average cost per
, year for the preceding twenty-six years.
ms last year, year OF peace, the cost OF
the army was SIZE, 100000 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;" large standing army was un-
necessary then, so our statesmen thought
and the result proved.
1t is alike unnecessary now unless mill
ldI Is TO become. part pOI1cy.
If we are to play the role of the .'big
! policeman in the South American states
requiring each to act according to some
! administrat TONS conception tof decency
| in industrial and political matters" and
further require it to keep order and pay
] its obligations, according to the stand
! ard which may be set by each succeed
| ing administration; and if, in addition
the admlniStra tion may at pleasure see tC
| it that the states govern themselves vel
| and be prosperous and orderly accord
l ing to the criterion, which may be sci
| by each administration, then we readily
| admit that we should have an army cost
! ing 115,00O,000 a year. We should also
! cheerfully admit that an attempt to en-
| force such a policy would require a much
! larger army than we have now and &
| much greater expenditure Of money thar
| S115, ,000, 600.
Dealing With South America
But the people have not as yet ap-
| proved the administrators policy in deal
| ing with the South American states. They
have not yet said by their votes thai
president the power to interfere with the
| internal affairs of a Sodif American state
| at pleasure, to investigate their form Of
government, to see whether or not he is
satisfied with it and in the event that
| he is not to summarily decree such pun
ishment as in his Judgment the circum-
! stances warrant But the president has
not the power to declare policy equiya-
| lent to threat Of armed intervention
whenever he shall decide the circum-
stances Justify it. An attempt to exer-
! else such a power would constitute 6
usurpation prohibited by the conStitu-
| ton of the United States.
| 1t is safe to assume that notwithStand-
! ing the letter to Secretary Root, which
| was read at the Cuban anniversary din
ner, no administration will dare attempt
to establish a universal protectorate Ovel
| South American states, or to become re-
sponsible for their misdeeds." Mr.. Oh
ney admirably stated the purpose of the
Monroe doctrine in his address at Har-
ward college March 2. 1898:
! 1.-The vital feature of the Monroe doc
| trine IS that no European power shall
/ forcibly possess itself of American soil
| and forcibly control the political fortunes
! and destinfes of it's people," That is the
national position and it will be main
! tanned.
But how South American states shall
! behave toward each other or whether they
shall govern themselves well or be pros
1 porous is not part of the Monroe doc
| trine. Until the people shall amend the
constitution SO as to permit the execu-
! ton of the remarkable policy suggested
by the letter of Secretary Root, it is per-
fectiy safe to say that we shall have nc
more need for a larger army than we
| formerly had. In the conduct of the wal
| department alone there can be saved tC
the people many millions year, but the
| administration does not propose TO save
| and is frank enough to say 1t.
Gives More Proof
Take another Illustration, which recitt
1 as furnishing strong preSumptive evidence
of extravaganza. Seven years ago, under
| Democratic administration, the civil an6
| miscellaneous expenses of the government
| ing all history of this country the ex-
/ penditures of this character had beer
| gradually mounting up as the country in.
creased in population until finally It haC
| reached $4,000, 600.
| Now, what has happened? So tremend-
| ouSly have our expenditures under thai
| head grown during the last seven years
| that the last fiscal year they amounted
| to $1S6 200, 600, more than double the ex-
/ penditures of 1897. If we deduct the ex-
i traordinary expenditures of the Panama
canal and rights, amounting to $4,000, 600
! we still find the expenditures under thai
seven years ago, an increase of more
! than 80 per cent. I have on another oc-
! casion referred to the. waste OF money
| in the Philippines, putting the cost to u:
| of $3.50. goo, 900, in addition to the S20,.
| 100000 paid to Spain for the opportunity
| of taking its place in wasting lives ant
money in the Philippines asserting no
| a dollar of it will ever come back to us
/ The answers so far have betrayed an at
| tempt to destroy the effect the Statement
| should have To that end an issue j.
] attempted to be made as to the amount
expended.
Stands by Philippine Assertion
The defenders of this policy of waste
| say that | put the figures too high. Al
| examination of the speeches of senators
| and representatives in congress recently
made, including that OF Senator Hoar II