Omaha daily bee., 1908-06-05

OF attempting to charge the party In
power with extravaganza in appropri-
ations, and repetitions Of his charge
nay be expected in various forms
from democratic sources during he
coming campaign. Democratic lead
ers have acquired the habit of making
this charge at the close of every SEES
sion of congress-, although results
have failed to show that they have
p%roited by it in a political way.
The question of the amount OF
money appropriated by congress is not
so important as the name of its ex-
penditure and the purposes to whion1
the money is to be devoted. Their
is no attempt on the part of h re-
publicans to conceal the fact that the
government expenditures have in
creased materially in the last dozen
years. They are willing to rest their
case on the contention that the appro-
priations are not chargeable to waste
or extravaganza, but have been made
to meet legitimate needs of the gov
eminent and to carry out administra-
ton policies admittedly in the interests
of the whole people.
The appropriations for the first ses-
sion of the Sixtieth congress were
slightly in excess of $1,000, 900, O0O,
although the amount that will have to
be paid out of the federal treasury for
the coming fiscal year will be much
smaller than that. In the first place,
the appropriation of 1923, 900 for
the Postoflce department is charged
in the total, while the postal service
is almost self-sustaining, and more
than $500, 600, 900 of the amount will
be returned TO the Treasury depart
ment from postal Included
in the total are s5S, 10000 for the
sinking fund and $25, 900, 900 for the
redemption of national bank notes.
These amounts do not come out of
revenue, but are charged as balances
by the government system of book
keeping. These totals alone, aggre-
eating about $3.50, 000, 900, must be
deducted from the amount that will
be taken from the federal treasury.
On the other items of increase a
question of party policy is involved.
Since 1904 something like 100000
900 have been paid out for Panama
canal expenses. The democrats will
hardly care to denounce that as an ex-
~travagance. The other big items OF
expense have been occasioned by the
increased pay of the officers and men
of the army and the navy and by the
creation Of a modern navy. To
charge this to extravaganza would be
to condemn the national development
that has followed the war with Spain.
The democrats went before the voters
once before on a platform declaring
the war n failure-during the days of
civil strife-and 1t is doubtful If they
will invite a repetition of that cam
paign by declaring against the main
tenance of an army and navy beitting
the nations position in the list of
world powers. The party at Denver
may declare against "~militarism," but
there is little prospect that it will de-
mand a reduction of either the army
or the navy. The army and navy costs
more now than they did in long-ago
democratic days. but honest democrats
will admit that new conditions have
made this increase inevitable.
The second count in Senator Gull
berson's charge of Extravaganza" is
the amount of money appropriated for
new Offices created by the repub-
lican administration in the last six
years. The list of these new officers
is unusually long, but the records
show that it contains the names of
agents, inspectors and other officers
made necessary by the railway rate
law. the pure food law, the meat in
spection law and other legislation de-
volving on the administration new and
important duties. The investigation
of the land and timber frauds, the re-
batting and freight determinations,
the prosecution of ~violators of the law,
have made necessary the employment
, Of additional agents and representa-
tives of the government In many lines.
The question is, VIII not the public
benefits aceruing from the enforce
ment of those laws justify the in.
creased expenditure?
The charge of "extravagance" can.
D not be seriously entertained until Sen.
= ator Culberson and his democratic as.
sociates are specific as to where and
how congress has appropriated money
without the prospect of satisfactory
returns on the investment.
OKLAHOMA MISREPRBSENTED.