The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-12-18

A0s. to sss his slersotyped phrase, Blair 4 Riro su"k
His manner Of ndueipg this belief 10 BY stating
h. The blanks were given ont by contract 10 the Lowest
;daefs hat Blair 4 Risss were tas lowest Bidders and
,bsry~y,cf royal paper, on which The blanks were
.;o,sd, esst SIS SO a ream in New York" Mark the
ology Their sample Of royal paper on which the
blanks were printed He does not say that the blanks
are all printed on that paper He uses the word ssss
Now. we coniess that We DO not know what The sanps d
avail paper which Mr.! Rives put 10. in order 70 OBJ
IN ,hs lob. may have cost He may have Withdrawn
N. ..s after he obtained the job. and he may have
,rt.d few blanks Il. but he does mol venture 70
that the census blanks printed paper costing
| New York sis 50 ! ream. II he does, he will
ind no one to believe him. Mr. Kennedy. the secretary
The Census Board has testified under oath. before The
Wentworth committee. that Messrs Gideon & Co have
to furnish paper for the blanks OF the census
now being taken for ,x dollars r@n beter than that
furnished by Blair & Rses for The census Of ls4o II Mr.
Kennedy speaks the uth. Mr. Rives must have made
aus diGsrencs between the apk be imposed on
line department and the paper he used IN executing his
work according 10 the sample difference which amounts
10 li.tle more than sish dolisrs rssH. aal = ss
Mr. Riyes then goes INTO an estimate 10 show that
when Blair Rves public printers the printing cost
.ss than when other persons were printers, Admit il
n be so and we ask. what doest amount to2 Nothing,
t ths Congress happened to order less printing those
vs.s-,has is all But in this connection Mr. Rives af-
.c,s 10 have detected US Of 956 SO in
OF the sum paid Blair Rives for Senate print
No from ls4 to 1912. He is mistaken. We found two
tens pad thai yearone Of them was the aforesaid
a sao $50 S. and the other 1884 49, Adding these
vo sums together, we stated the amount paid Blair
Ryes for Senate printing during the period above men
toned ii S25 34l and Mr. Rves cannot prove the ad
Gio i'd be incorrect unless he that rare arithmetic
u.d by his foreman before the investigating committee
Bv lie by, We would like to be informed whether Mr.
Riyes proves his loss OF $l5o day on the Congressional
osSs and yaPpsadr by That document sai li,a
The next point we shall notice Is that in which MI.
Rvss charges that we have ransposed the manuscript
evidence taken before the Wentworth committee, and
,hea liz evidence Of VIM Finn before that Of George
Gordon, on his reexamina,on. This charge. we must
ay, 10 an utter and unqualified tdehood The evidence
=, printed precisely n he order in which twas sent to
the Union Office. without change or variation. The ar
ungement Of the evidence made by Mr.. Wentworth.
'. presume--for it was so arranged TO do us the
greatest possible injury. All the evidence which could
otured against us was placed at the beginning Of the
document, without regard TO the time when il was
Gveu This was done before we were permitted 10 see
| h The evidence taken after we appeared before
the committee was treated with the same dsre-
rad Of dates When the manuscript came to the
Union oce the evidence Of Mr. Finn preceded that Of
NJ Gordon. given on his that Of
Mr. Finn, taken on the 2oth September preceded that Of
Mr. John G. Rives. taken the 10th Of September. We
followed the copy not choosing to take the responsibility
Of altering the arrangement. although that arrangement
was calculated Aiufe by giving an unfair presenta
ton Of the evidence. Mr. Rivess charge is false as
against u.s. He says that such arrangement Of the evil
dence as that which presents would disgrace any man.
We think 90 too and we leave Mr.. Rvcs to settle the
matter with bis friend ihe Hon. John Wentworth.
We close this hasty reply with mention Of the man
n.r in which Mr. Riyes attempts to the name OF Mr.
George Gordon He represents him as a witness sum-
noned by u.s. That is not SO. as Mr. Rives knew when
be made the representation. Mr. Gordon was summoned
BY the committee, and recalled by US. In every word
which be uttered before that committee we place the most
implicit confidence Mr. Rives may sneer at Mr. Gordon
because he is an humble But, despite his sneers
Mr. Ryes knows that George Gordon is an honest nian
We know him well, and, though he is an humble man,
We put ten times the confidence In his naked word thai
We put in that OF John c. Rives We not singular
this for there are few men in Washington, who know
both the men, who would not say the same. And how
bold is Mr. Rives He says OF Mr.. Gordon's evidence.
hat q know it 10 be false where il speaks Of me-" This
would leave one to believe tina, Mr. Gordon had spoken
II his own knowledge Of Mr.. Rives. Not so, Mr.
Gordon Only ,es6es that Mr. Washington. the partner Of
Mr. Finn in bidding for the printing. said that he could
obtain means from Mr.. Rves. and that Mr. Finn told
BIN that he Fnn) had given his bids 10 Mr. Rves for
bis examination. and that Mr. Rves bad altered and
turned them That IL all MIR. Gordon said OF Mr. Rves;
yet Mr. Rives with flourish Of irumpes and says
ii know ii to be falls where il speaks Of me-" How con-
snptible the exhibition
We viii see what will be the next emanaton from the
printing oracle.
sigpor BslIstu.