Saint Mary's beacon. [volume] (Leonard Town, Md.) 1867-1983, 1885-07-23

| Tuesday last tho commlssionaB Cour
held special massiDg and awarded th'
county printing far do ensuing yoar. Col
Allstnn appeared Cor the BHAooN and Mr.
FsNpk n, Holmes ipF the EaAAyfsM AT
iss haasina areuassni. tho Eoesa asMrdoC
the printing 70 The Hsie,4sIas fus S5al oysl
me nRAooE's bid Of 1925. BY . sege a. X
] aud one hlAnk7 The eape was Opened by
toel. Allsipn ~ sskiAe pnfnhsssan n with
draw a f.nmeF I'D and sahssisatg Stethel
ID IL place Tie Sesu.iasiDn aSls ~ was
ersntsd. and the case nroeeededwi,A. The
following Is but an imperfect synopsis Of the
remarks Of counsel Col, AIlsaon read the
local law and argued that L was mandato'
ryI ihes d rsquiied thp matter TO 10 taken
up tseIals shaelose Of he Levy terms stated
that Commissioner hAd tpld him TIA. the
bli hid hcen preaeniad Ia simefo action
hot;are levy was closed. hat thai los some
reason Il bad not been taken up. hsll had
been from tine 10 tins deferred. by such 40
ton, said he, Me Hoard rofused to e. their
daty end had treated bis clients dlsopnrte-
puslg. Tho Inv was plain, but pos.a single
effort had been made 10 comply with it.
The Hoard no presumed having evad d the
requirements q TIE first section Of tho law,
would new make the award under the sec
ond section. This clients were the lowest
bidders, then It was plainly the deity u the
board, Il tiey We're true 70 their o9lis, to
give saem the printing. Ifthe Esskrpfe
offered 10 do The work at lower flsare, IL
was the duty Of the board 70 give 1t tosaem.
He presented, he said, the bid Of his clients,
not as Editors on BEACON, hut ~ prin-
ters, who would do the county work by
handbills or otherwise faithfully and we'll,
and would give bond for the faithful per.
Torrance Of their contract The Colonel
impressed the point he desired 10 make by
illustration. If, he said, tho beard had a
house TO build and four on five contractors
bid for the work, would they not, II liond
be given 10 project them from loss, award
II to the lowest bidderS He thought they
would, and he reminded them that as they
would act for themselves, 50 should theysact
for the taxpayers whose Representatives
they were. If they acted otherwise, they
were false to themselves, false TO the tax
payers and false TO their oaihs. Ek,
MIR. HOLMES ARGUMENT.
Mr.. Holmes prefaced his remarks by tie
statement that he, for d long time past, had
not appeared publicly in his capacity, as an
attorney, but in this, as in previous case,
his interests were assalled and he appeared
AZ their defender. He defined contract
and stated that TO consummate one, both
sides must be willing to contract 1.-THE
Court, he argued, had not the willingness
10 contract they need not do it. The ~
you fail" in the last section Of the act pro
yided for this unwillingness and negatiyed
the mandatory ''shalln Of the first section.
The act, he argued, conHicted with the Bill
Of Rights, which declared against fostering
monopolies The act was passed, he con
tended, in the interest of the BEACON ard
to foster It in the monopoly ofcounty work.
The present Editors were heirs 10 the BEA.
cons prestige and good will, and should
also justly inherit It's Wrpng-dninRs ard
Ahort-oonlings. How, ne argued, could the
question Of laf sest circulation be arrived Az
Editors could appear before this Court, he
stated, and perjure themselves without fear
Of legal prosecution orpunishment Apro-
duction Of the books would show names,
but not whether the subscriber was bona
tide (paying) subscriber A week ago, he
stated, democrat had been attacked and
sharply criticised because he had placed on
advertisement in the Enterprise. Ifit was
wrong for q democrat TO advertise in re-
publican paper, was It not, he asked, equal
ly criminal for democratic paper 20
employ republican lawyers II was
the height of impudence, be stated, for
the BEACON to ask for the county printing,
but there was no limit to what II would do.
He would not be surprised If liz proprietors
were to walk into his Office and claim his pa
per or anything else. Mr.. Holmes then.
read bill showing that the BEACON had
given the local laws four insertions, who're
as three, he argued, was all the law requir-
ed.t He did not adduce this, he said, 10
find fault with the board for passing the
bill, but to show the way the BEACON
charged. He compared the charges Of the
BEACON and Enterprise for publishing the
local laws---the former four times; the lat
ter, three which, he stated, was all the law.
required.
In bis comparison, Mr.. H. was mistaken
in his figures, and was corrected by Col.
Allston. For publishing the local laws, the
BEACON received $500; the Entwprise 1872.
Mr.. Holmes was personal in most Of his re-
marks After the arguments the award
was made as above stated.
In replying TO structures upon his
clients for employing republican attor-
ney, Col. Allston adduced the precAdentsl
set by the National Democratic party in
securing the services Of Conkling and Of
Andrew johnson in retaining Matt Car
penter.
Col. Allston explained thatithad been
the universal custom among printers since
the inception Of the business TO give four
insertions when three weeks notice was re-
quired.
though on C0sghs."
Ask for Rough on Coughs" for Coughs,
Colds, Sore Throat, Hcarseness. Trocbes
lbc; liquid 2bc.