The Grangeville globe. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho) 1907-1922, 1915-04-29
Figures Compared and Statements Analysed by Senator
Randall, of Nez Perce County, Who Shows the Alb
surdity of Alexanders Million Dollar Boast.
MOSES OFFICE BILL MORE THAN HAINES'
Charges Hanes With Everything Credits Himself With Like
Amounts. Cuts ON Educational and Penal Institutions.
Figures Juggled to Suit Purpose Desired.


Of April L. 1915, there appeared in the
public prints OF practically the entire
northwest a financial statement issued
by Governor Alexander, in which he
claimed to have saved for the tax
payers of Idaho the remarkable sum
of 1.1S5, 1864 by his acts during
the first three months of his admin
istration. If true, these figures are
tremendously important to the entire
state in a congratulatory way and
men of all parties should rejoice be-
cause of them. If they are untrue,
they are quite as important, but in
this case there is less cause for con-
gratulations both on the part of the
people and the governor as WELL
The question is, are they true?
Somewhat reluctant to take issue
with the chief executive on SO serious
an issue, but impelled by a desire to
arrive at the truth and particularly
because no analysis of the statement
has appeared in the northern part of
the state, the writer has undertaken
the task of pointing out few discrep-
ancies which quite materially alter the
final figures In approaching this
task it goes without saying that where
played the result depends entirely up-
on the fairness and accuracy with
which these schedules and figures are
employed. With a desired end in
view, almost any set of figures can
be manipulated so as to produce that
end. Even with no end in view, other
than the truth, opinions will differ as
to the combination to be employed so
that different results will be produced
For these reasons 1t is not claimed
that the result hereinafter reached Is
the only one that could be reached.
Divers conclusions have been arrived
at in other parts of the state which
may be just as satisfactory from diff
NAV be Just as satisfactory from diff
ferent points of view.
So far as the governor is concerned,
1t Is not intended to Dispute the accu-
racy of the separate appropriations
of the two administrations as given by
him. Iiut the manner Of their com
bination will be questioned and the
Justice of changing certain items 10
one administration and credhing GER
tain items to another Will be chai-
lenged. A fair handling of all fig-
ures and schedules should produce
true conclusion and this article is in
tended to show nothing else.
AS "expenses of the state govern
ment for the years 1913-14' the gov
ernor charges the Haines administra-
ton with the following:
Anpropriations -. ~, 4O5, 2Sb.oe
Bond issues ........ ...'''.. "A'''
l Money used from Carey act .o =,
fund .......'.''''' ''V''"''O'
- oc- noe eS
Total .......... 1900. -'s@' oo'' -0O'o'
Passing by the first item of appro-
priations. for the present, and taxing
, nm bond issues, the first thing 10 DC
| observed is that the entire amount OF
the bond issues was not part OF ths
) "expenses Of the state government io'
tho wear 1e13-14." The bonds run ioi
long periods and were not entireS
paid off during that term. But I'm
comparatively slight inaccuracy Is ho
the important thing: 1t is, rather' INC
: bonds to the amount OF $2ooOoo WON
never negotiated during that auiiiin
istration. In other words, the hlone'
IN he raised by the sale OF THESE oonu
was in fact, never raised Inc ca
n1onot,on is that the rate of interes
: fixed in the bonds was SO 10" .nA
~ hond buyer would take them. Thus
far as the f1dlhCS
< was concerned, the result was tn
same as II the act authorizing tlei'
had never been passed. 1t, thereiore
cannot be charged with the proceeo
!. of these bonds for it never receives
such proceeds. This eliminates the lul
e sum of 5000, 900 from the governor
: schedule charged against his preue
5 cessor. o,,s
e This error would be serious enoue
r r. this were all there Is to h-put'
e isn't The bonds in question-hisn u
# wav bonds-would never have 10
e Maid hut for the specific act OF Tn
T Governor himself. That Is, the gov
ernor signed senate bill 66 which au
thorized the state treasurer TO issu
e state highway bonds In the sum
+ 5000 900 at a higher rate of lnteres
}. than was borne by the Haines lssu
}. which failed. The bonds authorize
}. nv the bill which Alexander slsne
Y and approved have been sold ana ~
a administration has already receNe
= the money for them As the governs
d could have vetoed this proposal TO ooi
row money by bond sale just as