Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1880-11-12
The Actual Figures on All of TIT
Specifications.
The State Expert Wishes to Drop
the Matter.
MIR, ROBINSON STILL SILENT.


Enterprise and still asserts that the APPEAL i
publishing forged bids. He says:
The bid which is now printed by the APrEAl
as that of Henry r. Mighels never be
fore the Board of State Printing Commission
crs, notwithstanding the Endorsement of Mr.
Daugherty thu. such is the only bid CD file
Willaa T. Hanford was the Deputy Stat.
Controller and Clerk of the Board of State
Printing Commissioners He ought to know
whether the original bid was withdrawn, and
if so, by whom.
An APPEAL representative called a: the Con
troller's office yesterday morning and Mr..
Daugherty informed him that the bids on I'll.
were endorsed en- the back by William T..
Hanford, the Clerk Of the old Board. Only
one bid was ever presented by the APPEAL
office He called the attention of the reporter
ts the fact that in copying the original bid
somewhat hurriedly he had omitted one
Specification, "fgure work, fer which spcci-
fcation Mr. Robinson had put in no bid
This is doubtless what Mr.. Putnam alludes to
when he says that the bid printed by the AP-
PEAL "never came before the Board" In an
argument of this kind clerical error is a very
small loop hole to crawl through The AP
PEAL is enaeavering to get at the bottom of
the matter, and will print every fact bearing
| upon the case and on either side Of the ques-
| ton.
1t has been limited that a surreptitious
changing of the bid took place after the bid
| was put in. The bid shows no erasiens ex-
cept at the end of the clause under specifca
ton 2, intended to cover "all forms not ether
wise specified" the words "plain composition
were erased. This, as admitted by Mr.. Rob-
insOn himself, was done in the presence Of
the Board by Mr.. Mghes, as it was held that
call forms not otherwise specified" might also
have rule and figure work on them, and the
Board simply wanted to know how much per
thousandthese would be charged for in lump.
The members of the Board were not versed in
typographical terms and were guided almost
entirely by the Expert, Putnam, who led them
to believe that there was grand chance for
defrauding the State under Mighelss bid,
while under Robiuson's everything would be
serene. They therefore awarded the bid to
Robinson.
ESTIMATING THE WORK.
The APPEAL, considering itself defraaded
by the award, offered to prove that the State
would be loser by accepting the Robinson
bid, and thorough measurement was there
fore made Of every scrap of printing which |
the State would require to be done. The fol- |
lowing are the figures according to measure
ment made by Mr.. Joseph Ballard and we
challenge Mr. Putnam or any other printer to
dipute them.
THE ACTUAL FIGURES:
All forms and blanks used by the Legislature
were estimated at total of 1895. 163 ems.
Robinson's bid, 80 per thousand ems. 1914 10
APPEAL " 20 Sc I" 6. 1913 70
Difference in favor of APPEAL bid 1920 40
On letter heads, receipts, roll calls, envel-
opes and bill blanks the aggregate was 90, ITO
copies This made at
s3 90 per thousand Robinson bid). .$16S SO
81 90 80 " appeal bid) -. liz %
Difference in favor Of APPEAL bid $50 IL
Advertising bids for printing and stationary
)ue HlOnI0, 90 luSeEGIouS VI Aoc e9uo % d. w
,ents per square 6rst insertion and rs cents
per square each subsequent insertion Robin
sons bid ..... .$lO6 90
Same work at 80 cents per square
irst insertion and 20 cents each sub. Ii
'equeat insertion (ApPEAL bid). ..... "a 80
Difference in favor of APPEAL 1913 20 '
Printing Treasury report, "a insertions
Robinson's bid) $24 90
APPEAL bid ................... IA 40 q
Difference in favor of APPEAL 80 60
The difference in folding and stitching all
he work measured between Robinson's bid,
sixteenth of one per cent, and the AP.
EAL bid, one.twentieth of one per cent, was
20.
This makes the total difference in bill work
nd Legislative blanks in favor of the APPEAL
id 1896 81.
The blanks used at the Secretary Of States
flee were estimated at IA, $50 copies. =
It $500 per thousand (Robinson's
ldC ........... .$4o %
It 81. 90 per thousand (ArrRAL bid). % 80 q
difference in favor of APPEAL bid $14 40 =
At the Governors office the estimate was
,ade at $500. :.
At 800 per thousand (Rebinsons p
id) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. 30 50
t g.. 90 per thousand (ArPEAL bld).. 90 d