ficiency of the year would come up to $190,000,000." That would shake the country to its foundation.

What was the fact? As said a moment ago, Mr. Gage reports a surplus of $79,000,000 for that year, so that Mr. Atkinson was $269,000,000 out of the way of the truth. That variation of $269,000,000 is over 55 per cent. of all the expenditures of the United States government for the fiscal year of 1900. In the next sentence, Mr. Atkinson says:

"A deduction may, perhaps be made from this sum in view of the fact that the number of volunteer troops on which the computations of the secretary of war are based exceeds the number called for by the officers of the army itself. We may therefore possibly reduce the probable deficit to a minimum of $150,000,000."

That is, the lowest minimum he mentions is $150,000,000. All right. Even at that, as we had a surplus of $79,000,000 he is $229,000,000 out of the way, but, as we have just found, he says that probably the deficit will be $190,000,000, at the lowest minimum $150,000,000; so that, giving him all we can by adopting the construction of his statements which is the more favorable to him, he is still $229,000,000 to the bad,-enough to enable us to safely conclude that we are very polite and

considerate to him when we refrain from saying anything worse of him than that his computations are unworthy of serious consideration.

But let us go on. On p. 10, he says:

"In the matter of revenue, Secretary Gage holds out the expectation to secure $205,000,000 from duties on sugar, tobacco, cigars, rice and tropical fruits. The decisions of the courts are, however, continuous and final to the effect that whenever the jurisdiction of the United States is extended over an area of territory, the inhabitants thereof become entitled to move without let or hindrance throughout the country, and subject to the same laws for the collection of revenues as have been previously in force in the United States. It, therefore, follows that, if the sovereignty of the Philippine Islands and Porto Rico is assumed, their sugar and other products, like those of Hawaii are entitled to free entry. . . The loss of revenue, under these conditions, would be approximately $75,000,000."

Here is where he is willing to act as secretary of the treasury and as the Supreme Court of the United States,-a task that does not seem too burdensome for him. "The decisions of the courts are continuous and final to the effect," he says, that we should lose $75,000,000 in the fiscal year of 1900 from the $205,000,000 the secretary of the treasury said we should receive. You will notice that Mr. Atkinson is perfectly confident about what the law

has been, is and will be. "The decisions of the courts are," he says, so and so and "it, therefore, follows" so and so. There are no reservations.

66

Now, what is the fact? I do not need to tell you. The decisions of the courts which he says were continuous and final" to the effect that we should lose $75,000,000 from customs because we could not keep tariff on sugar, tobacco, cigars, etc., etc., that came in from the Philippines and our other island possessions, were not "continuous and final," to the effect stated by him.

The United States Supreme Court has decided this much anyway beyond peradventure, namely, that Mr. Edward Atkinson was wrong, when he said that; and we have been collecting our customs on all these commodities all the while he said we could not, while we said "perhaps we can't, but we shall;" and for the year ending June 30, 1900, when our secretary of the treasury said we should collect from customs $205,000,000-and Mr. Edward Atkinson said we should take in only $130,000,000-we actually did take in from this source (p. vii., Secretary Gage's report, 1900; 2d item, top of page) $233,000,000; or $103,000,000 more than Mr. Atkinson tried to make us fear we would secure, only.

On p. 10 (idem) Mr. Atkinson says:

66

The only conclusions which can be derived from these official data are, therefore, as follows:

"Deficit computed by secretary of treasury for fiscal year ending June 30, 1900, $30,000,000.

"Add for the necessary increase in the army, navy and pension estimates to cover the expense of military occupation, armaments, fortifications, renewal of forces, increase of pensions and for other matters of positive necessity under such conditions, say, $85,000,000. Total deficit on secretary's computed revenue, $115,000,000.

"Add prospective loss of revenue from sugar, tobacco, cigars, rice and tropical fruits, unless some way can be found for evading what are apparently the decisions of the courts in this matter, $75,000,Probable deficit, $190,000,000."

Now let us look at his second item in this table. 'Add for the necessary increase in the army, navy, and pension estimates to cover the expense of military occupation, armaments, fortifications, renewal of forces, increase of pensions and for other matters of positive necessity under such conditions, say, $85,000,000." Now the facts are that Mr. Gage estimated $237,000,000 for the war and navy departments combined and $145,000,000 for pensions, or $382,000,000 in all. Mr. Atkinson says that there should be $85,000,000 added to these, that is that

they should be $467,000,000. Mr. Gage reports (p. vii., 1900 report) that he actually expended for these three items, $329,000,000. Mr. Atkinson's estimate is $467,000,000, that is, $138,000,000 too much.

"Probable deficit $190,000,000" and on the next page he repeats the statement. This is his third statement to this effect in the course of three pages, and we must take it as his best judgment, for he repeats it more than any other one figure; and, as we had a surplus of $79,000,000 instead of his deficit of $190,000,000, he was, as said before, $269,000,000 out of the way; that is, his error is equivalent to more than 55 per cent. of our total expenditure for the year, which was $488,000,000!

Is this people to trust such a man as that? Is he entitled to our support? Is he to be taken even seriously after having deliberately put out such statements as these? A man who knew nothing at all about the finance of the country could hardly have done worse, and yet I have called your attention to only half a dozen statements. There are many more which my limited space forbids mentioning; these I have shown are only typical-I have omitted far more than I have mentioned.