Evening star., 1924-03-28
Tax Figures Disputed.
Articles on War. Navy and Veter.
ans Bureau Held Misleading.
To the Editor OF Tne star:

ans bureau delu NlIslcduiuS'
To the Editor OF Tne Star:
In your paper for the past several
months there have appeared various
articles, written by John F. Sinclair,
entitled. Can your taxes be cut.
Among these articles have appeared
several concerning the War and Navy
departments and the Veterans Bureau
purporting to set forth the costs OF these
agencies of the government.
These articles. however, are so full
of erroneous statements and mislead-
ing figures that l think they should
be corrected, especially as SO few
people actually know the facts and
are apt TO accept Mr.. Sinclair's state
ments as correct.
/ note a member of the American
Legion has already taken exception to
the figures given by Mr.. Sinclair in
connection with the Veterans Bureau.
The erroneous statements and miSrep-
resentations set forth by this gentle
man are illustrative of the mistAk eS
and misleading statements in Mr.. Sin
clairs articles concerning the War
and Navy departments.
Reference to War Costs.
In his Chapter XVII Mr.. Sinclair re-
fers in length to the indiscriminate
expenditures and costs of the late
war and goes into details as to what
this huge sum of money would do in
the way of new schools, better homes
and other more desirable needs than
being used for war purposes. This
line of argument is somewhat along
the pacifst line. II is admitted that
l11 t..nlF duo fZGy OF %
government in an emergency and
there were indiscriminate eIpendi-
lures but our entering into the war
was certainly 1usttiable and for our
own future protection. w nat sooG
would additional schools, additional
salaries and professors. etc. as sug-
gested by MIR. Sinclair, do if we had to
bow to the will of a foreign dictator
and pay indemnity possibly many
times greater than our war cost
Chapter NVIII is so misleading that
will not attempt to take up every
thing in it. However, i wish to point
, out that ii is quite unfair to charge
the War Department with the interest
on the late war debt. There should
be separate analysis of the eX-
penses OF the War Department, and in
terest on the war debt should not he
included. Mr.. Sinclair states that
"s796 out of every $1,000 for war" but
he does not show what proportion OF
this is for the present maintenance of
the national defenseS and what part
of il is interest on debt incurred as
a result of our folly in the past in
not properly preparing ourselves Tor
war.
.Burdeu of Preparedness
Notwithstanding big war debt,
Mr.. Sinclair goes on 10 attempt to
show that our present preparedness
program is an enormous burden. His
statements would lead one to believe
that we had force of ST1.7,0 men on
our pay rolls. while in fact we have
only a small force of regular troops
of 10000 officers and 111.000 men at
present He also fails to bring out
the fact that many of our professional
soldiers are performing duties of a
civil nature, but paid from War de-
partment appropriations. Further
more. he does not separate the many
nom military activities of the War
Department from the national defense
activities. If this were done the cost
of national defense would be so small
, that it would not be worth considera-
ton. as compared with the erhe- big
expense enterprises of the govern
ment.
| that the war Department gets s1n0
out OF every thousand, but he Ioes
not show how much of this 500 goes
to the Panama canal rivers and har
bors improvement and the salaries of
the hundreds of military engineers
detailed to non-military activities.
The fact is the War Department gets
iS25 out Of every thousand and the
Navy gets s35; total of $50 out of
every thousand of taxation goes into
national defense. This is a very NOM
insl sum when it is considered that
the national government is RESPONSE
BILE for the national defense of the
various states and the state budgets
do not make any outlay for this pur-
pose at ali.
Taxes for Schools. Etc.
In connection with the states bud
gets, Mr.. Sinclair has apparently
overlooked the taxes raised by these
various units, all of which goes al
most directly into schools and other
state agencies for public welfare.
| None of these taxes, however, goes
for national defense. this being left
! to the federal government by our Con-
stitution.
clair should make such representa-
tions as he has in his articles, and
more especially in connection with a
discussion Of tax reduction. subject
P! that every one will read about. And
to give such erroneous figures in con-
nection with national defense is un-
fortunate in view of the present ef-
forts Of our various patriotic organ
izations, civic associations and citi-
zens to have Congress provide for
suitable national defense in order to
avoid another war like the last one,
which cost us nearly a hundred thou
sand human lives and so much money.
L. Q. BARNES.