The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1871-11-03

domlnaat Partyln tpiH 6tste eHSx HoSSPt.
ing subj pr6gramme. 4 is struef We
beliess thu. thSScoloyed rotsrs migE be
disposed to make the concession, as a
meter ultimately to oonduoe to their
welfare. But their oarpes-bag and other
advisers will control them until the ruling
power ID ta&sn. from them ct Che ballot
box, il falls. from weak and pal,
sled hAnds.. Ios;l lsT.T I--...a a5r1.l-
The state Prlasing-The ..Cas.,' In that
-sfiffJ 5ijs s.Esss:...
When Dickens drew his character of
the ''Artful Dodger," he must have had
in his minds eye just such character as
the Union's editor. After. dodging all
the pertinent questions put to it, and
trying to get off on sideor minor issues. it
attempts to show that it had agreed with
the New York Tribune in its criticisms
upon the ''thieving oarpet-baggers. I"
""s kao" that it did effeot 70 do 80, but
we also know that lis effort to mislead
public opinion as to its real attitude,
was too thin" for success with persons
OF discernment. We now move to
another point. The Union, in referring
to the subject of the State printing. has
anticipated us only little. That was
the next matter that wc had determined
to take up before it opened it's lips on
the subject. Some time ago there ap.
peared Communication in the PHGNx
signed ''Veritas," making sundry state
'nents with reference to the Un,on,
which that journal called false and libel
loua. It demanded of the proprietor of
the PHGHIx the name Of the writer, that
he might be sued for libel. The proprie-
tor OF the PHGNH protected his CORES
pondent, declined to give the name, and
took the responsibility of the alleged
libel. That was the end of the affair.
We mention this to say that We had.
aud have nothing to do with that article.
But the writer resumes the subject upon
his own responsibility. We desire to
have a full investigation of the matters
connected with the frauds which he has
reason to believe have been perpctrafed
in connection with the State printing.
That the State has been swindled ont of
q large sum Of money in this connection,
We have not the shallow of doubt. AS
far as our information fairly carries us,
we shall go. and We shall expect the
Union to supply all the points it has.
We ask, then:
1. Is it not true that printing com
pany was formed to do the public print
ing, and that it did perform it's worka
Q. Before the Union passed into the
hands Of the present proprietor, what
was its relationship and the relationship
Of its editor to the said companyp
8. L. it true, as alleged. that the said
company numbers, or has numbered,
among it's members Gov. Scott, Speaker
Moses. Comptroller General Nsss!s aud
other officials? and was its President not
Josephus Woodruff, the Clerk Of the Se-
nHte7 49,
4. Is it true that about $3.50. 900 have
been paid out on account of the public
printing oinoe the last Legislature-to
say nothing Of other claims pending on
this account to the extent of $50. .OOO2
s. Is it true that of this amount, from
$35. 900 to $45.0O have been paid for
public printing to about twenty Demo
cratic papers Of the State. and that from
$35. 900 to S45, ,0J0 have been paid to the
three Radical papers?
6. II 80, what has become of the bs-
lance-about $3.50 0O0-paid ont on nc
count OF the public printing?
z. II there has been long division OK
short division, let us have the names of
the diviooTs.
II, now. the Union. or any other party.
can throw light upon this subject, it
ought to be done. If the matters here
alleged can BIZ disproved or corrected, let
it be done. Let justice be done. II the
charges made are true, and we are in
clined to think that the whole truth has
not been brought out, our readers can