Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1880-02-03
state Printing.

y. T. Pillsbury & Go. don't appear to
be satisfied with having the State Printing
done the present year by Spraguc IL son.
though the rates for printing are Just he
same as Pii,sburv and 20. had Inst gear,
and prices have advanced and are still ad
vancing. Pillsbury Il Go asserted last
year that the rates they offered were the
lowest the work could be done for. and said
they did not want it and would not
take IL any lower rate Did they lie McH
or do they lie nom! They say the com
mttee went into the star chamber bust
ness. The committee was appointed three
weeks ago. their appointment was pub
lished in all the papers at the time and
they have been approachable any day
since by any party who desired to see
them in relation TO printing. While F..
+. Pillsbury Il Co. were hanging around
the bogus legislature. and pouring
out their abuse and filth upon the
real legislature. the committee had
an opportunity to look into the
printing business. and when they got the
proposition from us to do the work NJ
Pilisbnry &C Co.'S terms they took the adj
vice Of some OF the best and most expert
cnccd printers in the State and closed the
contract with us. II f.. +. Pillsbury and
Co. aud their proxies chose to dance at
tendance upon the thing at Union Hall
which called itselfa legislature. instead of
waiting upon the printing committee car
lier. they have nobody TO blame but them
selves. In regard to the cost of printing
the Standard says
The printing fur the year 1879 will not
cost sis 900, and of that amount the kenne-
bee Journal received over $1,000 for lcgisla-
tive printing done last winter. The printing
for 1878. which was done entirely by the
Journal company. cost the State 81, 600, and
We fail to see wherein any more work was re
quired in ISIS than In 1872.
What the printing for the wear 1879
will cost Pillsbnry Il Go. do not know
The printing is not yet completed. But
they give their readers to understand that
II win be about sl5. 600. of which Sprague.
Owen 4 Nash drew they say $1,000. and
f.. r. Pillsbury 4 Co.. Of course have drawn
the balance. 81. eco Now rs a matter of
fact. Sprayue. Owen 4 Nash drew in 1879
upward of -. 600. which added to the sum
that +. r. Pillsbury & Co. claim tor them
selves (si2.ooo) makes the printing bill for
the year s2o. 200. by referring to the State
Trcasurcrs' reports il will be seen that
this is above the average annual ex-
pcnditure Tor printing for the three years
previous to 1879. the expenditure in each
being ne follows: in 1876. alS.659. 40. in
1877. go. 666.62; in 1873. sl9.99a.Ss.
So according TO this. taking Pillsbury Il
Co.'S statement of what their bills are, and
what we know the bills of Sprague. Owen
& Nash were. we find that the print
ing bill for 1879 will be larger than for
any other year since is75. and this al
though the publication OF the agricultural
report was abolished by the last legisla-
TURF. the bill for printing which was gen
orally about 5000. Had the agricultural
report been printed the expense for the
year would have run up to about S23.-
900.
This appears to be the upshot of the
great reform in printing promised by T..
+. fillsbury \ Go. last winter. taking
them at their own statement rs 10 what
their bills amount to