Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1878-04-17
The City Printing.


late Board of Street Commissioners would
not be lost upon its successor, and that the
latter would profit by the offic al mlshaps
which befell the former. Public expecta-
ton has bean somewhat disappointed al.
ready, and it is by no means certain that
under the new dispensation, things are to be
managed any better than they were the past
year How ever, it is we'll to hope for the
best, and to have faith in the old maxim
that ia bad beginning makes good end
ing" Meanwhile we want TO caution the
present Board against any repetition of such
an unwarranted proceeding as tina of the
Common Council at its meeting Wednes-
day evening in the disposition made by it
of the city printing. 1t was plainly in de-
fance of law aud a fraud upon the
taxpayers, for which there is manner of
excuse Following is the provision of the
charter upon that subject:
1.-THE Common Council shall annually
provide that all printing authorized and re-
quired by them 10 be done for their use, or
for the city, shall be let by contract to the
lowest responsible bidder, :or the term of
one year: provided, no bid therefor shall be
considered, unless the same shall be lower
than the rates of legal advertising, as fixed
by law and in case no such bid is made
the Common Council! is hereby empowered
to provide for such printing in such man
ner as they may think proper"
Now, it will naturally OCCASION surprise
when the fact is stated that the Council
awarded the printing to the Democrat par
ticularly as the proprietor of that paper
had..submitled no bid, and that proposals
had been handed in by the REPUBLICAN and
Harger's Times. And the establishment is
increased when it is known that the work
was given to the Democrat at price more
than five times that of either of the other
papers. Certainly some explanation Of this
action should be made, and we are anxious
to see it. Taxpayers are also interested in
knowing what the Board has to say in its
defence. Some of the members claim that
no bids were properly before the Board.
This is understood TO be the position Of aid
erman Kusel But this subterfuge will not
answer. When a resolution was introduced
in the Board of Street Commissioners April
lst, to advertise for proposals to be SUBJ
mitted to the then inc coming Council, Aid
erman Kusel, who was in the chair, ruled it
out of order. In other words as a member
CT the Board of Street Commissioners he
commits wrong, which as a member of the
Common Council he takes advantage of and
assigns as a reason for not subsequently do
ing right. If there were no bids properly
before the Council, whose fault was it, if
not the Board of Street Commissioners who
refused to invite proposals? But the bids
of the REPUBLICAN and Times were there
offering to do work at ten
cents per folio for which the Democrat s
paid sixty cents. The neglect or failure of
the Clerk TO present the bids to the Board
was another trick, no less detestable than the
one Already mentioned. ana was probably
the result of a secret understanding between
the Board and Clerk by which the. latter
was to perform this little piece of chicanery
But several members of the Board knew the
bits were upon the desk of this accommo-
dating official, and they furthermore knew
that when voting the printing to the Demo-
crat, they were doing an illegal act, and
squandering the peoples money. All the
facts and circumstances tend to show that
Dem ocratic maj GRITTY in Dem ocratic Board
have put their hands in the treasury and
taken not less than two hundred dollars
themfrom and bestowed it on one of their
party organs without the least shadow of
right. This is the plain English of the
and no amount of pettifogging
will make it appear to the contrary. The
question now is, How do tax payers like it,