The Idaho world. [volume] (Idaho City, Idaho Territory) 1864-1918, 1871-02-23
CRAM AND THE STATESMAN"


The Idaho Statesman makes feeble response
to the charges preferred by us in our last ISSUE
and asks what there was to prevent us from
inspecting the schedules and making bid for
the printing, in the month of january; aud al
SO asks why weignore all mention of the letter
sent us by Mr. Cram, notifying us of the post
ponement of time for receiving sealed propos-
ais In reply to these queries we answer, that
the editor of the WORLD within week after
tho passage of the printing BILL" returned to
Idaho City, and that every issue of the States
man, particularly, was closely inspected there
after, to see the Controllers notice, in accord
ance with the requirements of the law. When
we say every issue of the Statesman, we mean
the Tri- Weekly, as no copies of the Weekly are
ever sent to Idaho.
The object of the law in requiring the publ
cation of a notice that sealed proposals for the
public printing would be received by the Con-
troller, on or before a certain time, and at
place therein to be indicated, was, as a matter
of course, to give it the greatest publicity pos
sible, in order that there should be COMPETE
ton, and that the printing would be done at
the lowest rates. While the letter OF the law
was complied with, 30 far as publishing it once
a week, still the spirit of the law was not COM
piled with in giving publicity to the notice, as
it was smothered in the Weekly Statesman, not
copy of which was sent to printing Office in
the Territory, the only ones that would com
pete with that institution for the contract.
Nearly, if not all, the local advertisements or
business cards which appear in the Weekly
Statesman are also to be found published in the
Tri- Weekly, but the notice of Mr.. Controller
Cram did not appear in the latter until after
the Democrat had exposed the conspiracy be-
tween Cram and Reynolds.
As to the letter written to us by Mr.. Cram,
we will just state that the letter was not re-
ceived until after the Democrat had informed
us of the whole matter-some five or six days
after the time when bids were closed accord
ing to Grams notice. The letter informing us
that the time for receiving bids had been
postponed until the 18th was q gratuitous act
on the part of Mr.. Cram for which we do not
feel ourselves under the slightest obligations
whatever, as the Tri- Ueekly Statesman, of
February 9th notified us of the postponement.
If Cram was so anxious that We should put
in bid it would have been just as easy for
him to have notified US before the 4th of Feb
ruary as afterwards. or to have published the
notice in paper which was sent in exchange
to the other printing Offices in the Territory,
80 that we would have been liable to have seen
it. The afterthought of notifying us of the
postponement cannot cover up the secrecy with
which the rascally game was attempted of Sc
securing "fat job" for Reynolds.
The Statesman, in reply to our charge of
suppresslng legal advertisement simply states
that "it is a shameless and baretaced lie"
Criminals nearly always deny their guilt. We
did not expect our Radical neighbor TO plead
guilty, but we will simply state that We are
prepared to back up our assertions and sub
stantiate our charges by incontrovertible evil
dence. We repeat what We stated in our last
issue, in regard to the suppression of the pub.
LEGATION of the summons in the divorce case al
luded to, and can prove our charges at any
time. The loop hole out of which the guilty
parties expected to crawl was not large enough,
and we will give details when necessary