CONIPARISON OF NATIONAL EXPENDITURES. A comparison of the budgets of leading nations to show the place occupied in each of the several classes of expenditure is an inquiry which tempts the student, but which is confronted with well nigh insurmountable difficulties. The most serious is the fact that while data for the finances of the several local governments are frequently missing, the distribution of functions and therefore of financial responsibility between the nation and the various subordinate governments differs greatly in the several States. This distribution rests upon constitutional provisions and adminis trative regulation. In comparing national budgets we find lithe that is common to all except expenses of foreign intercourse, na tional defense, and public-debt charges. To as certain, therefore, the proportional costs of the several items of public expenditure would require a compilation of all the expenses of all the local governments in addition to the figures for na tional expenditure. The lack of figures for such The nomenclature of the Treasury report is here adopted, though the interest on the public debt, a permanent charge on the revenues. might appropriately be included among the net ordi nary expenditures. The table displays in con densed form some tendencies of expenditure in recent years. The fall in the interest charge is local expenditure renders a statistical study of national budgets. without note or commentary. valueless. The proportion of military and naval expenditure in the budgets of the Great Powers. as shown in the following table, reflects quite as much the distribution of functions as it does the importance of these expenditures: compensated by the rise of other expenditures. the aggregate ordinary expenditure here given doub In Austria-Hungary the Government whose expenditures are here noted exists only for the purpose of the common defense and foreign inter course. Russia and France as compared with the
German Empire represent highly centralized countries, many of the functions performed by the several States of the latter being carried out by the eentral Government in the former. Again. in all the countries named, exeept great Britain and the United States, the military and naval ex penditure represents a peace footing.
Another obstacle to a simple comparison of national budgets lies in the varying extent to which the nations concerned undertake industrial functions. The inclusion of the postal expendi tures adds 116.6 million dollars to the aggre gate for the United States in 1901. In the States above compared, except Austria-Hungary, postal expenditures are included, to which the cost of operating the telegraph system is added, except ing the United States. Moreover, the French na tional budget is charged with the expenses of operating the tobacco, matches, and gunpowder industries, together with the expenditures due to the management of the State forests and domains and the rather limited system of State railways.
The Russian budget bears the costs of opera tion of the alcohol and tobacco monopolies., of the railroad system, and of the State domains, which swell the aggregate expenditnres of the min istries of Finance, Agriculture, and of Ways and Communication to 645,000.000 rubles, A more common illustration is offered by Prussia, where in an aggregate ordinary expenditure, by esti mates of 1902. of 2431 million marks, the cost of operating domains, mines, and railways is given as IOSO million marks, a sum which is more than offset by receipts from operation, but which swells the budget in comparison with States with less varied industrial functions.