The independent-reporter. [volume] (Skowhegan, Me.) 1909-1955, 1910-06-16
The State Finances
portland Press

portland PreSS)
Several weeks ago the Democratic
newspapers of Maine started their US
ual biennial hullabaloo about Repub-
lIcan extravaganza in the manage
ment of the State finances. 1t is the
same old story, varied only by names,
dates and amounts, and it has been
told so often it has become familiar
and tedious. They have to make their
campaign on something, however and
this fnsue seems to strike them as the
most available. Criticism Is not diff
ficult 1t is always easy for those
who do not have the responsibility to
claim that they could have done the
work better. The burden OF the
Democratic song is that taxation has
been increased, that the expenditure Is
the largest ever, and that resources
have been exhausted. In his address
at Sanford Hon. w. B. Shelton of
Lewiston takes up and replies to these
criticisms in a convincing manner.
1t is true, as he says, that expen-
ditures have been increased under he
present administration, but "the only
question is whether this increase has
been legitimate and for the public
ROOu, W1tlIltI lllt Dupll1 AhOiiCy o
have been honestly and wisely dis
bursed. The State has spent more
because it has had more to spend and
because there was need OF the eXpen-
diture. Direct taxation upon the
property of the people has not been
increased, but the larger resources
have come from the corporation and
similar taxes, amounting as Mr.. Skel-
ton points out to $l,750,000 in round
numbers, or nearly half million dol
lars more than the entire direct State
| tax. What has been done with the
money? Comparing 1909 with the pre-
ceding legislative year 1907, 1t ap-
pears that there has been increased
expenditure of over a million dollars
to be exact 81 44,324-and that this
includes payment of temporary loan
Of 100000, and of $3S0,000 in reduc-
ton of the State debt. The increases
over 1907 include In round numbers
1921 900 for educational purposes,
$3.50 900 for hospitals and other State
beneficiaries, $88,000 for roads and
bridges, $4,000 for agricultural pur-
poses, $63 600 for protection against
forest fires, $37 600 for increase of leg
islative salaries, $4,000 on account OF
the new liquor law. $4,000 for in
crease in taxes collected by the State
IN wild lands and returned to the
Counties in which they are located.
100000 on account of the enlargement
of the State House-all of which ac
C ,rnts for 92 per cent of the total
Increase.
Where would the Democrats have
4ID ~ fl,A II ~
If they had been in power? Would
they have denied the money needle
by the common schools, the norma
schools and the State university?
Would they have cut the amount for
the supply of the insane hospitals and
tho charitable institutions? Would
they have refused the 100000 for the
home for the feeble-minded? Is the
building of good roads extravaganza?
Was 1t plumber to vote money for the
fighting of the browntail moth and
other destructive insects and for the
prevention of contagious cattle dis
eases? Would they have denied an APP
lropriation for the home for the
blind? Would they have put off the re-
construction of the State House. And
wi at have these censorious critics to
say to the fact that all or most of
these increases were urged by Demo-
cratic members of the Legislature and
supported by Democratic voters?
1t Is only when an election ap-
proaches that these critics begin to
raise the cry of extravaganza, make
comparisons with 1882 or some other
period In the dark ages. and preach
economy and reform. But true econ
omy does not consist in pinching and
starvation. True economy Is consist
ent with liberal and judicious expen-
diture, guaged according to the means
and the needs. The test is whether
the money was needed and could be
afforded, and whether 1t has been used
wisely to conserve the best public in
terests. We believe hat application
of the test vindicates the administra-
ton of Gov. Fernald and the work of
the Legislature.