Daily Republican., 1879-05-26
That Investigation.

DAYS, the REPUBLICAN averaged o,o4l
in circulation, the daily circulation
being placed at the head of our rdi-
torial column every day, so that our
patrons and readers might see what We
claim. For several days past the ques-
tion of the circulation of the newspa
pers in this city has been actively can
vassed, the question having b'en
sprung upon the public by the every
Evening" in a boastful article in which
the editor claimed to have the largest
circulation Of any paper published in
the city, and intimated that he would
like to see this question OF circulation
definitely settled by a committee OF
business men. We Immediately assent
cd to this expressed desire, and not
thinking it worth while to drag in
committee of business men at loss OF
time to themselves, We proposed that
the editor himself should visit the
REPUBLICAN press room and satisfy him
self that we printed, sold and delivered
to subscribers an average daily edition
of about 5000. We proposed that he
should count the number of sheets
there wers in the quire (25) and
then count tue number of quires in
cur wet down stack before we started
the press. He could have easily soen
for himself that there were 100 double
ouires, equal TO 200 single quires, wet
down, and without any great arithme-
cal effort he could easily have multi
piled 100 by SO, or 200 by 2j, and in
either case the result would have been
500. We then proposed after he
IN de this count that he should remain
and see that every one of those quires
were run through the press, and if he
saw proper he might count them oven
again to prove his first count as they
came from :he press. We furthermore
proposed hat il he got tired we woulG
furnish him chair to sit on during
the TIM the edition was running
throlgu the press at the rate OF ahou
thirty papers minute, and had on
plain windsor chair proved too hard fo
the 'rnder person Of the editor, W
would have gone across to the Mora
Suasion re, ms and borrowed an arm
char with a s 1T cushion III it, for tn
occasion. We also proposel that tn
eii'o. should p.ac3 an agent III ou
mailing office to see that all the paper
were soli t, the newsboys, mailed
to our sui scr ers, and delivered to on
route carriers. We Furthermore sal
that We would hp satisfied with the re
port that the editor himself might max
for we really do not believe he woul
misrepreseutt the matter after being full
convinced that We have the circu!atiO
tla, We cls i'm. We did not know whf
bette fer to make than taat, and
any of oar patrons and readers ca
think OF IN uffer that would give br
tnr opportunity for arriving At I'll
truth Of the question at issue 10 the sa
isfaction of the Every Evening edit
or any other person, we would ike
hear from them. We made tu.s offer
the .ior f the "i.very Evening, pc
sonally, or knowing fall we'll what II
report of an honest committee would b
we apprelen ei that the editor won
not believe i, and wou.u think that v
had, in some mani e., s. u.e wool
ovrr tar eye,,f IT," commilte = Shanl
as it may seem however, he decln'es
accept our offer in the following isl
guage which we clip from Saturday
"Every lvenin5"
9TH REPUELicAN Invites the editor
the '!Ev-ry Evtnin,n to in'pect
press aud mailipg rCOu5 aHd 80. +
himself tha its claims are crr'~r..
Joins the "Eyery kvpnipg," ho"evr
in suggesting hat the o'i-cr papers a
range for an investigation 80 :. al 4
vertisers shall be informed Of tn, tNa
facts in this, TO them, important IL
ter. We object to the plan the i'Erl
LlcAN proposes because it would be 'm
another iOru Of cOntl oyer>y - inter
ted parties, whereas we propo'e
-rxamnation by persons ha'lh&
ints est in exa9gerating the ciIcuia'i
of any paper"
in common par,anca The foregoi
excuse is "very hin.' We do not q
h2a controversy cold be prelonge
after a mpliance with the offer mac
If we are satisf 4i with the report til
the elitor Of the Every Eveninl
could not avoid making, we do H
know who should be dissatisfied, a
We know of no persons NOR interest
than the aforesaid riitor and ourselvt
stead Of accepting our effer, howey,
tns editor proposes "an exalni:.ati
by person, having no interest in exa
gerating the crc.iation of any paper
We cannot see this remark in a.
other light than an acknowledging
from the editor himself that he cou