The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-01-23
THE PRINTING MONOPOLY.

Abiding to the DEMOCRAT, the Lottery
Company, In It's card printed in the Times and
Picdyat7le, says:
Processing ut times an invincible opposition
to all monopolies, 1t has passed over all other
monopoies except ours. and has enjoyed large
profits from monopoly ofits own, In the pub
lie printing, etc.
This has been the flippant assertion flung at
us as a taunt by the subsidized press of the
Lottery Company, from time to time, for the
purpose of casting discredit upon our as
saults upon that institution, which they
could not answer with arguments. Coming
from the source It did, we never deemed a
refutation Of the innuendo necessary. 1t was
too patent to the community that our ac-
cusers were only longing, thirsting for the
opportunity to be as Infamous and inconsis-
tent as they represented the DEMOCRAT to
be. Like those spinsters Of Ismail, the vene-
rable PIC and the more lusty Times, aweary
OF their enforced celibacy, were wondrously
soictous as to the time when they should
have to resign themselves to fate. We do not
know that the charge is any the worthier Of
reply ana refutation, now that 1t COMES from
the Lottery Company. or course there is
not reasonable or intelligent man
In the State who does not know
that the State printing Is not monopoly,
and, therefore, we do not see what good we
can do the State Printer or the DEMOCRAT, In
influential quarters, by explaining why 1t Is
not SUCH Still there Is measure OF gratifi-
cation in occasionally exposing malice and
idiocy. We presume that this feeling has In
Il. 49, L..
The State Printer Is State official. accord
ing to our construction OF the law. This was,
also, the view of the members Of the Printing
Board, who insisted that 1t was the duty OF
the Governor to set aside the bid made by
him, on his alleged failure to furnish the Sc
curity required, and appoint successor.
II this view be correct, there cannot
be any more justice In the charge that he Is a
monopolist than there would be In like
charge against any other State offical-the
Governor, the Auditor or the Chief Justice.
There is but one State Printer, but what Of
that2 There is but one Governor, with an
enormous patronage and power in his hands,
yet 1t would be sheer nonsense to say that the
Executive office should be abolished for that
reason, or that 1t is a monopoly. Under such
construction every private contract, to
build house. to pave street, to construct
any public work, would make Of the con-
tracing party a monopolist.
It does not at all alter the case to say that
the Public Printer is not q State official. but
mere contractor, who has obligated himself
to do a specific work, with or without compe-
tition. Does Capt. Eads, who engaged to Sc
cure deep-sea navigation to New Orleans by
contract with the government, enjoy a
monopoly Certainly no such charge would
be entertained for moment.
The State Printer holds no exclusive privi-
leges-has conferred upon him no public
franchises. He is State official, with GER
tain duties to perform and certain work to
do; or, IL you will, is mere contractor, who
has engaged to perform certain specified work
at given price. In either case, 1t certainly
cannot be said that he enjoys monopoly
and any man who 80 charges either does not
know what a monopoly is, or else he is
prompted by malice, and means to Islander
and misrepresent