Meigs County telegraph. [volume] (Pomeroy [Ohio]) 1848-1859, 1853-03-15

PubLfsnINo OF THE LAws.-We see by the pro-
ceedngs Of the Legislature that bill has at last
passed both branches reducing the price for pub
fishing the laws to 60 cents per thousand ems-a
reduction Of fifteen cents per 1000 ems-and leav-
ing discretionary with the county officers wheth-
er they be published at any price. Now we have
something to say on this subject, and we intend
to say it, as time and opportunity serves.
1. What induced this contemplate act of leg
islation1 Did the people of the State petition for
it7 Did the tax payers complain that the printers
throughout the State were paid TOO MUCH for pub
fishing the Insignificant and bungling laws of this
miserable, one horse legislature2 No. Hundreds
and thousands of petitions were sent up there,
which were not only disregarded, but treated with
contempt but we defy any member to produce the
petition Of single idnividual for this law. Not I
complaint was heard-every body seemed conten
with the law as it was, although we admit it wa
dcfective--yet not half as defective as some o
the laws passed this winter.
q Was itbecause they thought the laws passed
this winter so far inferior to any ever passed be-
fore, that it was right and necessary to reduce the
price, lest the people MIGHT complaint We shal
not question the insignificant and worthless char
acter of the laws; they not cheap at any price
Many of them are simply worthless, the rest are
positively injurious. But are printers to blame
for thisl Is not their work as well done as for
merly7 Then why visit the sins Of the Legislators
upon the unoffending printerl Perhaps it is be
cause it was the printers who brought forward
these ignorant ragamuffins, pulled them into no
toriety, and were thus instrumental in sending
them to the Legislature! We certainly think tina
in many instances, editors deserve punishment
for their former reckless course in recommending
unworthy candidates. But IT is certainly the ex
treme Of ingratitude for these men to administe
the rod. We shall be more cautious in future
who we recommend for Office.
8. Was tbs law passed because the Legislature
had an honest desire to curtail the State expen
ditures, and thus tighten taxes? No! We say
rMrHArIcALLY, MOI They have INCREASEI
their own pay, although their services would b
extremely dear at one-fourth what they formerl
received. They have increased the salaries of TIN
public officers FIFTY PER CENT They have IN
CREASED the number of servants who wait o.
these GENTLEMEN ri Legislators, and increas
ed their pay In short they have fairly distance
all former LegiSlaturesin the expenditure of pub
lie money. 1t comes with bad grace from theS
spendthrfts to cry reIrenchment.
3. Was it because they did not desire the peo
pie TO know how little they have accomplished
This consideration doubtless had its weight.
4. Did they wish to build up Legislative, Ju
dicial, and State Aristocracy, by INCREASlN
the pay of public officers, and DECREASING tn
wages of honest and industrious LABORERS?-
Verify, ii seems so! Had they reduced their ow
wages first, then we should not have complaine
at the reduction of the wages of laborers. Br
we do not like to see ariStocracy fed at the labo
er'sexpense. 1t isn't Democratic.
s. Why was this law passed. Wemay be wronI
but we are firmly convinced that it was done fl
pure spite; merely because the editors, withol
distinction Of party have denounced the presel
Legislature as the most contemplate body tn
ever assembled in Ohio. But, more anon.