The Bamberg herald. [volume] (Bamberg, S.C.) 1891-1972, 1916-07-20

year.
George B. Cortelyou, who was
chairman, is authority for the state
ment that the Republican national
committee disposed of a little more
than s2,000,000 to elect Roosevelt in
1904. The election of President Taft
in 1908 cost nearly as much.
There are good data on all the
campaigns of 1912 both before and
following the conventions.
Those who sought the Democratic
nomination that year did so at to-
tai cost, in round figures, of $780,
600, divided as follows:
Woodrow Wilson % % % --S2O2,OoO
Champ Clark - - % 5O,Ooo
Oscar Underwood % % .. - $4,000
Judson Harmon - - - l46,OOo
The campaigns of Taft and Roose-
welt for the Republican nomination
cost 100000 or more, and the sum
was divided about equally between
them.
Statements filed by all the commit
tees of parties running presidential
candidates in 1912 show receipts and
expenditures as follows:
Disburse-
Receipts ments.
Rep'b'n s1,O76,391.51 s1,O71,54S.57
Demo. .. 1,159,44O.33 1,134,S4S.O0
Prog. .... 676,672.73 665,5O0.00
So'lst :. 54,5S0.96 66,5s7.S2
National politics so far this year
have been rather inexpensive as COM
pared with the preliminaries of 1912.
1t is safe to predict that between s3,-
100000 and 100000, and posi-
bly, a great deal more, will be dis
posed of in aiding the free and un-
trammelled voters to select chief
magistrate.
But, as stated, the money employ
ed directly on behalf Of the presiden-
tial candidates is a bagatelle as COM
pared with the total cost of ''election
year."
Some idea of the individual expen-
ditures by candidates can be gained
by the fact that candidates for con-
gress spent total of s13S, S,566.88:
The expenses of committees and
candidates as above did not include
municipal contests or preliminary
races. If everything could be includ-
ed the total probably would reach
$4,000,000 more. That for an off
year, socalled.
Further light on the subject of ex-
penditures, aside from and in addi-
tion to those for the promotion of
presidential candidates., may be gain
ed from the statements filed by men
who were candidates for United
States senatorships in 1914, the first
time federal senators were chosen by
popular vote.
Only one-third of the senate was.
chosen that year, yet candidates for
the thirty-odd places managed to get
rid of $46O,775.25 in impressing
their senatorial qualifications on The
voters of 81 States.
And half of it was their own
money! The rest was contributed by
adherents.
Percapita expenditures averaged
$3,074.63 for Democratic and ST.
S52.44 for Republican candidates. If
all the senate had been up for elec-
tion the filling of SO $500 jobs
would have involved campaign ex-
penses of $1,3S4,000.
Large as the figures seem, in all
probability they represent less than
one-half, possibly less than third,
of the actual expenses incurred by or
on behalf of candidates for places in
the senate.
While the method of using and
raising campaign funds on a large
scale is of modern invention, the
Campaign fund.- as an institution is
as old as popular government itself.
Sir Robert Walpole was probably
greater genius than Richard Croker
in handling such funds. He didn't
hesitate in using even public money
for paving the way to Westminster
for his adherents or for keeping
them his adherents after they reach
ed parliament.
John Wilkes, while boasting vocif-
erously that he had never taken or
would never give bribe, was pay
ing so pounds head for Berwick
freemen, who failed to elect him,
and 1000 pounds in bulk for Ayes
bury, which he won. Even the gov.
ernment could not outbid him.
Lord Chesterfield wrote that bor-
ough jobbers quoted him parliament
tary seats at from 5000 pounds to
Of 1ofn