Rensselaer Republican, Volume 23, Number 41, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 11 June 1891 — IN REGARD TO DEFICITS. [ARTICLE]

IN REGARD TO DEFICITS.

Indianapolis Journal. - A portion of the Democratic press is undertaking to persuade the country that there will be a deficit in the treasury, instead of a surplus, early in the fiscal year which begins next July, if not before. They assume that such a thing is unheard of in the history of the country, and would mean the bankruptcy of the Federal Government. While there is no danger of a deficit, or that the Government cannot meet all its current obligations without asking a loan beyond the extension of a part of the maturing four-and-a-half per cents at a lower rate of Interest, it may be well to correct the Democratic impression that there never has been a deficit in the treasury —a period during which the current revenues were less than the current expenditures in seasons of absolute Eeace. As a matter of fact, there ave been several such periods. One of these was during the administration of Martin Van Buren, during only one year of which were the receipts equal to the expenditures, as the following figures show; Year. Receipts. Expenditures. 1837..... 864,168 $37,243,496 1838 55,308,663 33,865,069 1839 ... 31,348,760 26,899,138 1840 19,480,115 24,317,670 Totals 199,079,688 $138,335,263

This deficit continued until the protective tariff of 1842 was fully in operation, when a surplus began to appear. In 1858, after the walker, or strictly revenue tariff had been in force a decade, another period of deficit came on because of the general decline in the volume of imports. The figures are as follows: Year. Receipts. Expenditures. 1868 ......... J46,®6,866 874,186,870 1850 «,486,466 69,070,977 1800 66,084,808 63,180,696 1 1861 41,609,390 66,646,645 Totals .1197,715,880 1879,933,490 Both of these extended periods of deficit in the federal treasury were during Demooratic administrations, and were the result of Demooratic policy and legislation. Because of the secession of the Democratic party in the South, and the general fear in financial circles that the federal government would be destroyed, the effect of the last period of deficiency was to almost bankrupt the treasury, but the statesmanlike policy of the Republicans averted the danger, and since the war, although the volume of the revenues has been reduced hundreds of millions, there has never been a deficit a single year. Th& cry was raised several times between 1873 and 1878, but at the year’s end the footings of the columns of receipts and expenditures showed a surplus. And although the last Con{;ress reduced the revenues by at east $60,000,000, on the basis of those of 1890, and made unusual appropriations for pensions, when the fiscal year closes it will be found that Republican administration has not followed theold Democratic example Of creating deficits. But why should the Democrats see such calamity now in a thing which has occurred twice, once for a period of six and again for a period of four years, as the result of Democratic policy and during Democratic administrations?