Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1923-04-15

compare favorably with those of
these other cities, then certainly
there is no need for worry on the
part of anxious friends and possibly
moro anxious than amiable critics.
Cutting Down the Overhead
To satisfy all classes of curiosity.
we have compiled detailed figures OF
cost Of all. District activities for the
years 1916 and 1921 and for the. as
nearly as possible. corresponding &C
tivities elsewhere. Some of the fig
ures are hard to reconcile. but OF one
thing the District should take note
with lust pride. Our general admin
fstrative expense is low and appears
to be decreasing. In other words, we
do more work In proportion to our
overhead personnel than is done In
any other of tho cities mentioned.
the lowest of all. about $1S, 401 900,
as against about $13,910,o00. s17.600,-
900, s13,s5l 900 and $23.7ss.ooo for
Buffalo, Pittsburgh. Newark and San
per capita expenses were ss3.5s for
the District and S2s.1s. 1904, $3.50
and Sl5.77 for the other cities, re-
spectively. In 1915. therefore. our
cost of government in the District
seems to have been very reasonable.
feet of tho war superimposed upon
normal growth. The total cost Of
government has grown. being about
s22.s7s.ooo for the DISTRICT and do about
S35.577.00D, respectively, for Buffalo,
Pittsburgh, Newark and San Fran
cisco, with corresponding per capita
costs Of $52.20, s51.19. &49.9s, 1888
and ,$62.s7 for the five cities of our
group. washington is with Newark
By far the lowest in total expendi-
lures, and it Is in the middle of the
group as to per capita cost.
Comparfson In Challenged.
It has already been pointed out
that area and density Of population
have much to do with the cost Of
city administration. the one factor
tending to increase costs, the other
to diminish them per unit Of popula-
ton served. The two cities that
show a lower per capita cost than
the District-Bufalo and Pittsburgh
are much less in area. and appre-
ciably greater in population. That
these differences would readily ac-
count for a greater increase in cost
than the 9 to per cent actually ex-
perienced seems hardly worth argu-
ing. and would leave out of consid-
Grafton also the one really vital mat
ter, namely. the relative quality of
governmental service actually f,v-
nished to the residents Of these cities.
1t would be arrogant to claim su-
periority. for the District. but it Is
certainly within the bounds Of pro-
priety to assert positively that.
knowing something of the cities
herein discussed. I feel that the Dis
trict may. without fear OF the ver-
dict. safely challenge comparison
either as to the character and eff1ci-
ency Of it's governmental institutions
and services or as to the attractive
ness and high quality of the final
result. namely, the city as 1t appears
to an Intelligent and minded
stranger. While much room for i'm
provement no doubt still exists,
| taken as a whole Americans gener-
ally have ample reason for the pride
they take in their National Capital.
Regardless Of differences, great or
small. and of the presence or absence
| Of certain details. we have here am
| Pile basis for deciding whether the
District of Columbia is governed well
or badly, economically or otherwise.
Let the nation Judge.