Rensselaer Republican, Volume 27, Number 8, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 18 October 1894 — Gov. Matthews on State Finances. [ARTICLE]

Gov. Matthews on State Finances.

Indianapolis Journal. Gov. Matthews, in his speech before the recent Democratic convention, made the folowing reference to State finances: “Our State debt, the largest part of which was incurred by Republican administrations and difficult to account for—that part that may be justly attributed to our party going into the construction of necessary State buildings and for improvements, and fpr every dollar of which we can show full value received —is now being diminished. During the but little over eighteen months of my administration there bas been paid $710,000 of this debt, and I trust before the iist-nl year may have slosed we may make it an even million. This, too, with the fact that we have lowered the rate of tax, including a levy for a sinking fund to provide for the gradual extinguishment of the State debt.” And he asked: “Is this not a magnificent showing, a glorious history of legislation?” It is a very disin?enious showing,, with nothing magnificent about it except the gall that claims great credit for the Democratic party for its tardy change from a debt-making to a debt-paying policy. The Governor’s statement that “the largest part of the State debt was incurred by Republican administrations” is not true, as can be easily shown by official records within two minutes’ walk of this office. The State debt in 1870 was $4,167,507, and this was less than it had been in forty years. Between 1860 ind 1870, during most of which time the Republicans had control, the lebt was reduced $6,011,760. No part of the debt as it stood in 1870 was created by Republican admin.strations. Every dollar of it existed when the Republicans first came into power into 1861. From 1870 to 1880 the debt was increased $830,671. rhe Democrats were in control of the State governmen t during nearly the .wht>»_ this period, embracing the administrations of Governors Hendricks, WtHiams and Gray, and th e increas ainth e d ebt was due on - tirely to bad financiering on their part. From 1880 to 1890 the debt increased from $4,998,178 to $8,540,515, and every dollar of the increase was due to Democratic legislation and financiering. During nearly the whole of this decade Democratic Legislatures were making appropriations in excess of the State's revenue and borrowing money to pay intterest, and at the end of the decade its interest account amounted to $273,825 a year. During the last few years of the decade, viz., from 1885 to 1890, the debt increased from $6,008,608 to $8,540,615. The peinocratic Legislature of 1891 recognized the fact that something must be done to increase the revenue and reduce the debt. They iared not go on borrowing money and piling up debt any longer. The people wore clamorous for a change of policy. This led to the enactment

of the present tax lalw, under which the revenues of the State have been largely increased. Auditor Henderson, in his annual report for 1892. said: “Instead of an annual deficit of half a million dollars, as under the old regime, we now have a net surplus of that amount. Instead of borrowing money to pay interest on the public debt, as was done under the old order of things, we now provide forour interest and have a large surplus besides,” Thus a Democratic auditor virtually admitted the criminal folly of the Democratic financiering that prevailed prior to 1891, and congratulated the people on the change that had been made. It was indeed high time for reform. When Governor Matthews came into office the State debt, according to Auditor Henderson’s report for 1892, was $8,830,615, and the annual revenue was the largest ever known. The auditor said: “The annual surplus in the State treasury above the ordinary expenses of the State government and the payment of the annual interest debt is $500,000.” The governor says: “During but little over eighteen months of my administration there has been paid $710,000 of the State debt-” As there was an annual surplus of $500,000 of revenue over expenses, there is nothing surprising in this. The money came out of the pockets of the people, and a Democratic administration could hardly do less than apply the surplus to reducing the debt which the Democratic party had made. The Governor’s claim that in addition to reducing the debt “we have lowered the rate of tax, including a levy for a sinking fund to provide for the gradual extinguishment of the Stat edebt,” is buncombe. It is true that the tax levy has been slightly reduced, but taxes have not. Owing to the largely increased valuation of property, taxes are heavier revenue- larger than -ever before. People who pay taxes will not be deceived even a little bit bv the Governor’s buncombe.