NATIONAL EXPENDITURE FOR PEACE AND DEFENSE.
1. Expenditure of the State Department.
2. Ambassadors of the first class.
3. Ambassadors of the second class.
4. How ambassadors were formerly paid.
5. Evils of the system.
6. Evils further described.
7. Abolition of the office of foreign minister.
8. The consular service.
9. The fee system of payment should be abolished.
10. Expenditure for defense is a necessity. II. Size of the army.
12. Relation between national and state defense.
13. Condition of enlistment.
14. A short term of service desirable.
15. How army supplies are furnished.
16. The navy. Its growth.
17. Not many vessels should be kept in active service.
18. Defects in the former division of the duties of the Navy Department.
19. Duties of the bureau of construction and repairs. Cost of recent vessels.
20. Duties of the bureau of supplies and accounts.
21. Economy effected by the change.
22. Modern practice in furnishing security for contracts.
23. Number engaged in the naval service. Naval militia.
24. Expenditure for sea-coast defense.
25. Present mode of conducting work at navy yards.
26. Remarks of Secretary Herbert.
27. Mode of employing workmen.
28. Contract versus government work.
1. To maintain intercourse and peace with other gov ernments, a Department exists for this purpose, the head of which receives an annual salary of $8,000, while his first assistant, like the assistants in other Departments, receives $4,500. The second and third assistants, how ever, receive an annual salary of $3,500.a 2. Of the representatives sent abroad only four are ambassadors, who receive an annual salary of $17,500. They are sent to Great Britain, France, Germany and Russia.
3. Of the ministers, only seven get an annual salary of $12,000; these are sent to Austria, Brazil, China, Italy, Japan, Mexico and Spain. Nearly all who are sent to the countries of South America receive $Io,000—Argentine Republic, Chili, Columbia, Peru, Guatemala, including Costa Rica and Turkey. The ministers to the following countries receive $7,5oo—Denmark, Hawaiian Islands, Korea, Netherlands, Paraguay, Portugal, Sweden and Norway, Switzerland; the minister to Greece, $6,500, and those to Bolivia, Ecquador, Hayti, Persia and Siam, $5,000.
4. Until 1855 a foreign minister of the first class received an annual salary of $9,00o, yet he succeeded in getting for his first year's service $23,250, so elastic was the business end of the government. How was so much fished out of the treasury? Besides the salary, the min ister was allowed an outfit of $9,000 and an infit of $2,250, and the average of the overlapping salary, making $23,250 as the actual expense to the government of a foreign minister who remained abroad one year. If he remained abroad two years, his actual expense to the government was $32,250, and his annual receipts were one-half of that sum. If he remained abroad four years, or a presidential term, his actual expense to the govern ment was $50,250, and his annual receipts $12,526.50.
5. By this system great evils arose. A minister got his outfit, equivalent to one year's salary, remained at home six or eight months before starting for his post of duty, and drew pay from the date of accepting his com mission. He then started for his mission, stayed a few months, drew his salary and infit of $2,250 and returned.
As thus worked, this high office was a very soft snap. No wonder that many came to think that the government could dispense with such officials with a saving of money and without loss of glory.
6. By this system it was learned that some Ameri can representatives abroad were paid too much, while others, who served long periods, were not paid enough. So in 1855, after an elaborate debate, during which a full account was given of the working of the diplomatic and consular system, a radical departure was adopted. A salary of $17,5oo, without an allowance of any kind for outfit or infit, was fixed as a reasonable compensation to first-class ministers.
7. In the olden times, when communication between governments was slow, the office was far more important. Now, all weighty negotiations are conducted by the im mediate representatives of governments, and the work of ambassadors has shriveled into that of carriers or bearers of dispatches—a service which can be performed by per sons of very moderate attainments. Consequently, the abolition of the offices has been urged on several occasions by members of Congress. Whether he may be even orna mental depends.
8. Those serving in the consular service are consuls general, consuls and commercial agents, and are arranged in two schedules, B and C.' Consuls-general and the first six classes of consuls receive a fixed annual com pensation, that of the consuls-general varying from $2,00o to $6,000, of the consuls from $1,500 to $3,500. None of the officials included in this schedule can transact business on his own account ; this is confined to consuls of the seventh class in Schedule B, the consuls in Schedule C and commercial agents. All are paid from the income re ceived, the consuls of the seventh class in schedule B re ceiving an additional annual compensation of $1,000. All are required to make a return of the fees they receive; and their annual compensation from this source is limited to $2,500.
9. The fee system is not only a small, undignified mode of remuneration, quite unworthy of a government so able to pay as the United States, but is grossly abused. Fees are exacted or increased when they ought not to be. The system has been broken up in part and should be entirely. Consuls should be required to account for all fees, and be deprived of all discretion or right to retain them.ia 10. Besides the expenditure to maintain intercourse and peace with other nations is the expenditure for de fence. This is a necessity, though opinions greatly differ concerning the extent of the preparations that should be made to defend the country against ex ternal and internal foes. How large should be the army? How much should be spent on forts and in im proving ordnance? These are questions of perpetual interest on which opinions will always be divided.lb
1. First may be considered the army. For many years the maximum number has been 26,61o, composed of twenty-five regiments of infantry, ten of cavalry and seven of artillery. The general commanding has long urged an increase, and General Miles would have the number bear some relation to the population—"the min imum of one soldier to every two thousand population and the maximum of one soldier to every one thousand population.'" By the law of 1899 the number of the regu lar army was raised to 65,000 men, and by the same law a volunteer force of 35,000 was authorized. As these ad ditions could serve no longer than July I, 1901, in January of that year the number was increased to Ioo, 000 men. The need of an increase is urged for internal protection. This is only a superficial way of looking at the National situation. Even with a smaller population, more viciously inclined, a larger soldiery would be nec essary. On the other hand, with a larger population, better educated and more law-abiding, the need of in creasing the army would be less imperative. Yet public sentiment, doubtless, would approve an increase based on such considerations. Not long since a considerable force was needed to preserve peace among the Indians; happily, that day has passed. Railroads have proved great civilizers, and soldiers once employed in that un welcome service are now released for other duties.' 12. The number that ought to be maintained by the National Government depends largely on the number and quality of the State troops, and upon the ability of the Government to use them in its defence. In many of the States excellent military organizations exist, and, if re quired, could quickly furnish aid to the National Gov ernment. At the outbreak of the recent war about 115, 000 men were thus organized, for whom the Government provided weapons. This arrangement is obviously de sirable for both the National and State governments. The State force, therefore, may be regarded as a power ful assistance to the National Government in maintaining peace and lessening the need of a National army or police to protect our National interests at home and abroad.
13. The soldiers for the National army are enlisted for a period of three years. Any citizen, or intended citizen, can enlist. The cost of advertising for recruits, of en listing and drilling them is considerable, which sum add ed to their pay renders American soldiers more costly than the soldiers of any other important country. The principal items of cost for maintaining them in the United States, England, France and Germany are added in a note.' 14. Under the present mode of enlisting, the soldiers change rapidly, yet this is not deemed a disadvantage, as a larger number acquire military experience, which could be utilized in the event of war.' 15. Supplies for the army are furnished by contract. Specifications are prepared and bids are solicited, awards are made, and the things offered are inspected before their acceptance. The system in many respects is quite perfect, and whether the Government is well served or not depends on the honesty and efficiency of its servants.' 16. Next may be considered the Navy Department." Only a few years ago all the vessels were of wood, and would have been of no account in a contest with vessels of modern type. Public sentiment is much divided on the question of a small or large navy. The United States is so isolated from other countries that many contend there is no need of a large navy to maintain National dignity and independence. Others contend that persons are unwilling to invest their money in ships until the Government provides for their protection. It is said, too, that, try ever so hard to keep peace at home, unpleasant occurrences are sure to happen. Without a navy, how ever high-minded our merchant marine may be, the ves sels of other nations will impose on our unprotected ships. A navy, therefore, it is urged, is absolutely nec essary to protect National rights and secure the growth of American commerce.
17. But if the building of so many vessels is justified, surely there is no reason why all should be kept in active service. In 1896 sixty-one were thus employed at an expense of more than $8,000,000. Pour of the finest ships were kept in the Mediterranean, and during a large part of the year at the single port of Smyrna. The daily cost of the cruiser New York was $1,131. The follow ing table shows what might have been saved by putting some of the ships in reserve : Besides this saving, officers and men would have been released for manning new vessels, which require skilled men in their preliminary "shaking down." 18. The Navy Department is divided into a series of bureaus: a bureau of docks and yards, another of engi neering, another of supplies, etc. When Mr. Chandler was Secretary of the Navy, during President Arthur's administration (1881-85), he advised that the two bu reaus of construction and repair be united ; he also re organized and concentrated the mechanical department in navy yards to prevent the duplication of work. His successor, Mr. Whitney, advised Congress to combine all authority under three heads: one to manage the person nel of the navy, another to purchase supplies and keep accounts, and the third to construct and repair ships. Al though the plan failed to secure the favorable action of Congress, it has been adopted to some extent without legislative action.° 19. The bureau of construction and repair is charged with the work of designing, constructing and repairing vessels. The expenditures for increasing the effective ness of the navy have greatly increased since 1891, and have approached the figures for all the other expenditures of the Department: