Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1873-05-15
THE STATE PRINTING.
Jones, Purvis e. Co.. Shown Up-A Broken
Contract on Their Part Proven.

Jones, Purvis & Co.. Shown Up-A Broken
Contract ON Their Part Proven.
JACKsBoRo', TENN, May IL, 1878.
EDITORS CHRONICLE: I see by refer
ence to the papers that the Public Printers
are disputing in the courts the right of the
Legislature to change the law in reference
to the Public Printing. Without entering
into the legal question whether the print
ing in dispute is such as the Public Print
ers have the right to in their implied con-
tract, I wish to call the attention of the
public to the following facts:
In November, 1871, the Legislature was
called on to elect a Public Printer. The
candidates were Thomas Waters, Paul,
White & Co., and Jones, Purvis & Co. The
law required each candidate to lay on the
tables of the members "a specimen page of
letter press.n At that time there were two
or more bills pending in the Legislature to
change the method of electing Public
Printer, to reduce the rates of compensa-
ton, to regulate the Public Printing and
prevent overcharging. Jones, Purvis &
Co., were then being investigated by
committee whereof / was chairman.
Being very anxious for a Legislative en-
dorsement, Jones, Purvis & Co., resorted to
various devices in order to be reelected.
One of these devices, as / infer from the
Columbia Herald, quoted in the Browns
vile Bee, of November "a, 1871 was to take
in large number of new partners from
various sections of the State. As thus
constituted the 2aeaO firm under the old
name was composed of ~. o. Griffith &
Co., of the Union and american, Roberts,
Purvis & Co., of the Republican Banner,
Gates, Cameron, Wisdom & Co., of the
Jackson Wing and Tribune, Rhea, Wood
son & Signago, of the Memphis Press,
Figures, House & Allison, of the Franklin
Review, Haines, Brothers & Bond, of the
Williamson Journal, Cowden & Co., of the
Lewisburg Gazette, ID. f. Wallace, of the
McMinnville NeW Era, G. b. Woodward,
& Co., of the Knoxville Press and
Herald" But Notwithstanding the nu-
merous and powerful reinforcements thus
received, "JOnes, Purvis & Co., still did
not feel quite sure of success and to "make
assurance doubly sure" the determined
by one tremendous act of unselfish
patriotism to make their moral suasion !"
as irresistible as their physical force. Ac-
cordingly, when they laid their " speci-l.
men page" on our tables, to our surprise
and delight, we found the following lines
vi Cuc III TOtc Do
though straight from their heart: 49, +
"B9 This is specimen of printing we
have done, and are prepared to do, for the
State. 1t is according to law and prece-
dent. Should the Legislature change the
IdaU we shall conform to their action, so
long as we may retain the position. We
have this to say, further and fuller, as there
has been an expression of doubt by some
of the ablest legal minds of the Legisla-
ture, as to the p0,Uer of the General Assem-
bly, to change the contract, by an amend
ment of the law relative to the price of the
Public Printing: If the law should be
changed, as to price or OTHERWISE. SO
that we cannot comply with it, we will
resign. In other words, if we continue
Public Printers, we will be governed in the
future, as in the past, by the law as it
stands at and after its passage, UHhoM re-
gard to legal q,ti6bles. II
Jones, PURvIS & Co.,
printers to the State.n
"The phrase "at and after its passage
evidently means "at and after the cleo
ti0n.n
After this act of magnanimity on the
re-elect them and reelected they were.
Now the questions I wish to ask under the
foregoing state of facts are these:
1st. Is it honest for j., P. q Co., after
thus solemnly promising us not to regard
illegal bubbles" to falsify their word to
US Legislators?
End. Did not this promise become part
and parcel of the contract between j., p. &
Co., and the State? ,lw
Sd. Are not j., P. & Co., estopped to dis
pute the active of the Legislature in refer
ence to the printing?
And the people will thus see, LIST, That
hn & nd
by the Legislature of 1S7172,
was not the Jones, Purvis & Co., who were
Investigated on charge of fraud and
End. That what of moral honesty was
brought into the new firm of j., P. & Co.,
has been contaminated by the old leayen
and that the neaO firm is now no better
than the old one. HENRY r. GIBSON.