Democratic Sentinel, Volume 4, Number 30, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 3 September 1880 — DEMOCRATIC ECONOMY. [ARTICLE]

DEMOCRATIC ECONOMY.

Fact* and Figures from llte Uccord. [From tlic Detroit Free Press.) Col. Joint Huy, Assistant Secretary of State, in a recent speech at Cleveland, attemp eel, l»y a distort ion of some facts And a suppression of others, to make it Appear that the country had derived no benefit from the control over expenditures which has been exercised by the Democracy during the past four years. The last appropriations made by a Republican Congress were those for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1876. The work of Democrats was first felt during the succeeding fiscal year. To show precisely what the facts arc we present below statements, taken from ofimial pul dications of the Treasury Department, showing the total expenditures—included under the headings of net ordinary, premium and interest on the public debt - —for each of the last four fiscal years for which a Republican Congress made appropriations, and the corresponding expenditures for the four fiscal years which have expired for which appropria - tions have been made by a Democratic Congress : , FOUR BEFUBI.ICAN YF.AII3. 1873 $ 230,315,21.7 1874 302,833,873 1873 271,823,332 1871) 285,101,081 Total $1,132,703,591 Four okMocratio vkaus. 1877.. $ 241,331.171 1878 230,904 320 1879 206,947,833 1880 207,012,957 Total $1,012,889,6 W Net saving in four Democratic years. .$ 119,813,951 But, perhaps, some Republican organ will say that a portion of this reduction is attributable to the decrease in the puldic-debt charge. While it would he a fair response to say that this reduction was effected liuder Democratic Congressional control, would have been impossible without Democratic concurrence and assistance, and that the very fact that it was effected gives the lie to tlic Republican charge that Democratic control of the legislative department is detrimental to the financial interests of the country, wo waive it for the present, for the purpose of presenting Ihc exhibit of the net ordinary expenditures of the Government for the years of Republican and Democratic control, included in the above table : UNDER REPUBLICAN CONTROL, 1873 $ 180,488,63*1 1874 194,118,985 1875 171,529,848 1870 164,857,813 Total $710,995,282 UNDER DEMOCRATIC CONTROL. 1877 $144,209,903 1878 134,403,452 1879 101,619,934 1880 171,885,202 Total $012,178,651 Not Democratic saving $98,810,731 These dire the figures as they appear in the exhibits of Republican officials. Upon their face they appear conclusive. But it should he said, to remove all misapprehension and to disarm all criticism, that the expenditures for 1874, as given in the treasury hooks, are $15,500,000 more thrfn they ready were, that being the sum received from the British Government in payment of the Alabama claims, and which is credited in both the receipts and expenditures of the treasury. It is partly offset in one of the years under Democratic control by the payment of $5,500,000 for the Geneva award, and by several millions of deficiencies contracted before appropriations were made by the Democratic House. Deducting the $15,500,000, and making no offset whatever, the reduction in total expenditures is nearly $104,000,000, and in net ordinary expenditures, so-called, of upward of $83,000,000. And, notwithstanding this large reduction, the Democratic Congress paid nearly $31,000,000 more for pensions to Union soldiers than was paid during the preceding four years of Republican control, as the following statements will show : REPUBLICAN EXPENDITURES FOR PENSIONS. 1873 $ 29,359,420 1874 29,038,414 1875 ~ 29,450,210 1876 28,257,395 Total $110,111,451 DEMOCRATIC EXPENDITURES FOR PENSIONS. 1877.. $ 27,9011,752 1878.. 27,137,019 1879 35 121,482 1880 56,077,174 Total $140,899,427 Excess of Democratic expenditures $ 30,787,970 If a Democratic Congress had made no change in the Pension laws, the expenditures for pensions for the four years in which they had control would have been only $110,000,000, and the net difference, in the net ordinary expenditures in favor of Democratic would be $135,000,000.

It will be seen by the above tables that the net ordinary expenditures for 1880 were in excess of those for 1876—-the last year of Republican control, when the Republicans lxiastfully proclaimed that they llad economized to an extent which Democrats c aid not improve upon. But it will lie noticed that Democrats in 1880 expended $28,000,000 more for pensions than the Republicans did in 1876; and that aside from this there is a difference in favor of the Democrats of $21,000,000. Democratic economy in other quarters made generous treatment? of the soldiers possible. It will also be observed that the total expenditures for 1879 were slightly larger than for 1876. This was occasioned by three items, none of which are chargeable upon the Democratic House. The first was an excess of $5,000,009 in the public-debt chaxge, caused by double interest in the refunding process; the second, $5,500,000 in payment ot the Geneva award; the third a Robesoil deficiency of between $2,000,000 and 000,000 iu the Navy Department. These sums, aggregating $13,000,000, if deducted from the Democratic total would make nearly that difference in Democratic favor in 1879 over 1876, and this, although the Democrats in 1879 authorized an increased expenditure of nearly $7,000,000 for pensions. During the four years of Democratic control, there was an average increase in the population of the country over the preceding four years of about 5,000,000, or fully one-ninth. An. inci< aso in net ordinary expenditures in proportion to population would have brought the total for the four years from 1877 to 1880 inclusive up to $790,000,000, against $710,995,282 for the preceding four years of Republican control. But the Democrats, notwithstanding the large increase iu pension expenditures, kept the total for lour years down to $612,178,551, a reduction of nearly $100,000,000. They did this iu the face- of intense Repul dican hostility, and with the national administration in tlioir hands could make an even better showing. But upon the showing as it is the Democratic party can well afford to claim the confidence of the peeple.