Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-10-22
TALKS ABOUT ECONOMY
PARKER ARRAIGNS REPUBLICANS
FOR ALLEGED EXTRAVAGANZA.
Address From His Veranda to a Dele.
cation of New Jersey Democrats
Yesterday Afternoon.

A dispatch from Esopus. N. Y, last night
says: Judge Parker this afternoon replied
to speech made by Secretary Taft, in
which the Secretary called upon the demo-
Gratis to give bill Of particulars in con-
nection with their charge that economy in
government affairs had been forgotten in
the years the republicans have been in con-
troll of national affairs. Judge Parker's adj
dress was made to a delegation from Hud-
son county, N. J.
Parker's Remarks.
He said in part: THE expenditures Of the
government-says the Observation-Disclosures
been managed in a spirit of economy as far
removed from waste as from niggardliness.
THAT the expenditures Of the govern
ment have been free from niggardliness
cannot, I think be successfully denied,
hence 1t should be, and is, frankly adj
mitted
with the claim that the expenditures
have been managed In spirit of economy.
we must take issue. The facts presented
in support Of the charge of extravaganza
have not been answered.
I'VE asserted that only seven years ago,
and under a democratic President the total
expenses of this government were less than
$500, 0O0, 600, and we charge that In the last
fiscal year the expenditures were over
$3.50 600 600. These figures have not been
denied, and they cannot be- Deduct1ng from
the latter amount the sum paid by this
government for the Panama canal and the
Panama canal rights, we still nave SooZ'-
900 600. After making that deduction, we
find that it cost about $106o00.OOO more 10
run the government last year than it did
seven years ago. That statement on It's
face raises the presumption OF extravaganza
and waste, a presumption which requires
evidence to overcome None mas peeh pre-
scented.
by way of indirect answer to the demo-
cratic charge of extravaganza, the inquiry
has been put by the administration Whetner
we propose to cut or the 'pensionsf we an
swer. certainly not And we further as
sert that the inference suggested 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. 70, which was fully considered
in my letter of acceptance, the amount PAID
for pensions in the seventh preceding year
would have exceeded the amount paid last
year. AS 1t was, the difference was only
81 500 OOO 1t 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 or seven years ago,
of over $166,O0O,OOO.
Would Reduce Cost Of the Army.
1.-The inquiry is further made by the adj
ministration whether we would dare to re-
duce the cost of the army. We answer
that most assuredly we would, and we ask
the people to decide between the admins
tration and the democratic contention on
that point. In the year 1897 the War De-
partment cost less than $4,000 oO, which
was about the average cost per year for
the preceding twentysix years. This last
year. year of peace, the cost OF the army
was Sis 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?
1--WE should further frankly concede that
the chances are that an attempt to execute
such policy will require a much larger
army than we have now and much
greater expenditure of money than $1Io,-
OOO, goo year. But the people have not as
yet approved the administrations policy in
dealing with the South American states
Civil Expenditures.
Take another Illustration. which I re-
cite furnishing strong presumptive evil
dence Of extravaganza. Seven years ago.
under democratic administration, the civil
and miscellaneous expenses of the govern
ment amounted to 800, 600, 900 for the year.
During ali the history Of this country me
expenditures of this character had been
gradually mounting up as the country In
creased in populatio until finally it had
reached the sum of $90,000,000
Now what has happened? SO tremen-
dously have our expenditures under that
head grown during the last seven years
that the last fiscal year they amounted to
$1S6 5000, 900. More than double the expendi-
lures Of 1897. If we deduct the extraor-
binary expenditures for the Panama canal
and rights. amounting to $5O.Ooo.ooo we
still find the expenditures under that head
to be SAG, 600, 600 greater than they were
seven years ago, an increase of more than
80 per cent.
IT have on another occasion referred to
the waste Of money In the Philippines, put
ting the cost to US at $3.50, coo. coo, In addi-
ton to the $20,0 eco. 600 paid to Spain for the
lives and money on thei Philippines assert
ing not dollar of 1t Will ever come back
to US. The answers soflfar have betrayed
a desire to destroy theqeffect the state
ment should have. To that end an issue is
attempted to be made as to the amount
expended. ssG
''The defenders of thisl policy Of waste
say that 1 put the figures too high. An
examination of the speeches of senator's
and representatives in Congress recently
made, including that Of Senator Hoar in
the Senate of the United States, May %
.lsO2, Will show that my statement of cast
was an underestimate. as 1t was intended
to be. '1
Experience teaches eysiry individual that
every exertion is required to keep ex-
penses within limits RE rule ts the same
as to the government Expenditures, but It
Is not always needed Indeed, of late 1t
seems to have been seldom needed The
pontfcian who said What Is the constftu-
ton between friends stated the view en-
vrf1 hot L. yfV1CK