Daily globe., 1881-02-23
Printing the Laws in the Newspapers.


To Whom, it May Concern;
The legislature is enjoying its regular travail
relative to publishing the laws in the news.
papers, and as usual there are few who
imagine that this matter is gigantic bonanza
to the newspapers and huge robbery OF the
State. Mr.. Mott, of Rice, having taken the
trouble to read to the House business circu-
lar which I issued last month, beg word of
indulgence. (see proceedings on second page.)
Personally, I do not care in the slightest
whether $4,000, $4,000 or nothing is ap-
propriated, as 1 have disposed of the depart
ment of business wherein law supplements
are issued. AS representative of the papers
I desire to see $4,000 granted that the work
may be paid for without any deficiency.
It is common to assume in a sort of insult
ing, patronizing way that this appropriation
is a gratuity thrown to the newspapers. It is
nothing of the kind. 1t is simply very cheap
pay for very valuable public service, and every
dollar is honestly earned. Every pub.
Usher can testify to the incorrect
ness of the statement that the larger portion
Of, the money goes to "ready print" or "patent
inside" establishments at st. Paul. The law re.
quires the publication of the laws so promptly
that it is q physical impossibillity for any
country paper to set the type and issue them
within the time specified. The pay is SO small
that even If it was not physical imposibility,
no publisher could afford to set the type for
the compensation. It is only by combining
and using one type setting that the work af.
fords any profit whatever. Any one
or all of the large printing estab-
lishments of the State can issue law
supplements if they choose, and if
Mr.. Norrish was correct in his statement, is it
not reasonable to suppose that dozen COM
petitors would he seeking the SIS 900 plum?
The fact is, the people are entitled to know
what their representatives in the legisla-
ture have done. The publication of
the laws in the papers is the only method
of reaching the masses of the people. By
uniting and buying supplements the papers
make q reasonable profit where they would
actually lose money if each one did the entire
work themselves. The State, in reality, forces
the union which seems to be so distasteful to
few men of whom Mr.. Norrish and Mr..
Mott may be consideded representatives.
The papers do not appear as suppliants or
lbeggars at the feet of the legislature. ! be-
lieve if it was gratuity, the work of the
country papers in developing the State would
make It legitimate, but it is simply
paying for services fully rendered.
The number of new papers in the State
started during two years past renders the
probable amount needed $4,000 instead of
$4,000 as before. 1t is as well to appropri-
ate enough as to compel 200 papers in the
State to wait two years for their pay. That is
all there is to this momentous question.
I am proud to say that I am willing and
anxious to promote the interests of the news
paper fraternity. They have repeatedly, by
formal resolution at their annual meet
ings, requested me to do so, and l propose
to fulfill the trust. We are ask.
ing nothing improper or dishonorabie, and l
feel obliged to the disreputable editor who
placed it in Mr.. Motifs power to read my
business circular yesterday to the House Of
Representatives. l am now out of the law
supplement business, and shall
buy my own supplements as the State papers
do, but as the representative of the fraternity
I maintain the legitimacy of the proposed ap-
preparation as rightful and small pay for val
liable services rendered. If the legislature
thinks otherwise, let them wipe out the appro-
priation, or even 60 further, and resolve that
they desire no newspapers in the State. The
fraternity will endeavor to survive either
action. 81. P. HALL,
President Minnesota Editorial Association.