Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-02-25
Incomplete Tables.

with so many factors producing varis-
ions IN the data presented, great care
| should be exercised in drawing definite or
| final conclusions therefrom. When differ
| ence is disclosed by the tables the first
! thing TO be ascertained with reference
| thereto should be whether 1t represents a
| difference in the distribution of govern
mental functions and activities or differ
| ence in the cost of local administration and
! II the latter, the reason for such differ
ence. 1t is hoped and believed that the
| form IN which the data are presented will
greatly assist the student of public insti-
tutions and public finance in arriving at the
correct Interpretation of all variations and
anomalies found in the tables. Only so far
as this is the case viii a complete COM
parson of municipal expenses and of
methods of administering public functions
and activities, which is the principal OBJ
jecc of the census investigation of municipal
finance, be facilitated
The Districts Peculiar Position.
Even with the admittedly careful treat
ment of the subject In statistics of cities
i. would be well If the District of Columbia
was treated separately, because of its
unique character, and not classed with
other municipalities under the head of
Washington, ID. c. How, for example,
can II be properly compared in its expendi-
lures with cities which benefit by state and
county expenditures which are not carried
either In the census statistics or in those
of Mr. Morrell?
The fundamental fact is Gas has repeated
" been stated in The Star and as was par
ticularly brought out In an article analytical
of the MorrelI speech printed last Saturday
that the District is state county and city
in one that its officers, and especially the
Com miSsiOEerS, exercise state, county and
city functions, and that it's expenditures
are the total equivalent Of state, county
and city expenditures elsewhere. More
over its character as the national capital
requires expenditures on larger scale,
partly because it is the residence of the
President and the rest of the national gov
eminent, and the representatives of foreign
governments. That is 1t not simply the
city of Washington, but includes a large
number of towns and villages outside, with
coco inhabitants, and stretched over a
large territory of a billy character, must
be taken into consideration in comparing
all classes of expenditures.
Even though the census bulletin does not
present these facts, so that its comparisons
are not exact and in certain classes of ex-
penditures it Is inaccurate, its general
classilcations at least uniform and
definite and its figures accurate Appeal
then, can safely be taken to them from Mr..
Morrells speech.
Washington Low Executive Cost.
The first definite statement In that speech
was that
The entire cost for instance. of the
executive office in Washington in 1904 was
So 1903; for Baltimore $1,000; Boston, $30,
go; Buffalo, $1,000. Apparently. from
these figures, the executive offices in Wash
ington are rather an expensive luxury"
The census bulletin states that the eX-
penses of the executive offices of the fol-
lowing named cities are: Washington, S25.-
COS. Observation-Disclosures office, Sl1 2}3;
council board of aldermen, etc. $5J,11J;
clerks of committees and council S2.4C0;
total SEQ, 40S. Observation-Disclosures Office,
S240 city clerk, $7,S2I; total, SOB, 157 st.
Louis-Mayor's office, $2l9TS; council, board
of aldermen, etc, S2j.S70; clerks OF COM
mittees and council Sll,332; total. 500, lS6.
Boston-Mayor's office, $21,93T; council,
board Of aldermen. etc, Ss3G59; clerks of
committees and council, S12, 1888; city clerk,
S55, 1891; total, $17L170. Newark. y. J.
Mayors office, $3.50; executive boards,
(other than salares), 81 2s9; clerks of COM
mttees and council (other than salaries),
$50; city clerk. 1884; total s464S4 Buff
falo-Mayor's office, SI017S; executive
boards $14640; council, board Of alder
men, etc, $4697S; city clerk, $12,51o; total,
$S4,311.
A Further Correction Necessary.
1t must be remembered that in this state
ment under the head Of the Executive Of
fees of Washington, u. c." the census Of
fee assemblies expenditures made in the
performance of functions performed else
where in municipalities by state officers
and by county officers, while in the figures
given for other cities no account is taken Of
what is paid for by the county by the
state, both of which perform functions Of
Importance within the limits of the munich |
palities No account is taken of the ex-
pense of supervision of such functions, for |
example, as the insurance department, |
elsewhere always a state matter-or the |
courts, charities and corrections, or a num- |
Der of other usual state or county func- |
tons.
true comparison of all expenditures |
made by state. county and city within |
each of the municipalities mentioned, with |
the expenditures on the three fold func- |
tons of the District of Columbia, would |
far the most economical
More Mistakes.
Mr. Morrells next statement was:
THE expense of the executive, assessors, |
collectors and auditors offices for Wash |
ington in 1904 was sIs1 ,G42; for Baltimore, |
s74,6G1 for Pittsburg $4,000; for ST. |
Louis S127 ,544; for Boston, S}s6.2s2; for |
Buffalo. SlOs.336; for Newark. $s1, T59. 1t |
will thus be seen that the Commissioners |
Office which corresponds to the mayors Of |
ice in other cities, the collectors, the all |
ditor's and the assessors offices cost very |
much more than all the other cities, except |
Boston, and more in proportion than Bos- |
ton. The Washington classification has |
been so highly differentiated as to create |
unnecessary positions. No city of the same |
size. as far as l can gather. has half the |
force and no one pays the clerks and as
sistants the high salaries"
Still keeping in mind the difference be- |
tween the ordinary municipality and the |
District of Columbia, yet without making |
any allowance for this. the actual compar-
ison of the expenditures on account OF the |
offices mentioned by Mr.. Morrell, shown
by the census statistics, demonstrates
clearly that the national capital spends less |
rather than more than the cities enumerat-
ed, and still better showing could be made |
by taking other cities which have much
larger proportionate expenditures.
Further Comparisons.
All of the conclusions of the census office |
are accurate, and in the connection stated
above the census bulletin shows that the
expenses OF the executive, assessment OF
taxes, collection of taxes and auditors Of
fees are as follows: