Telegram-herald., 1889-06-13

The readers of the EaStr need not Dc tpil
tnag fg has heretofore carefully avoided all
eonrrovrrsy with the Telegram Hcfstld. oi
fhis city though frequently tempted % pose
rs many laise prriensieus 81 business IA
flf- We have preferred 90 pursue tne even
tenor % our Nay. sg6mifttag our WORK q
discriminating public. without tfc e1ptoE
mrut of oAad wagon. Acontentoh Nhich
s~rns likely % Involve personal character or
business methods - not % our liking. aud an
exft Gsnce of ever torty years a. an editor has
convinced ~ that such controversies are not
Baf 81 nov 6avr a ease in hand which. IN
Ju-sicc 70 The public. secls 10 demand atten
ti0n-
ia an evening paper yester-
day appeared the above para
graphs. heading column OF
spleen ON the awarding by the Common
Council OF the city printing to the Tele-
gram Publishing Company. II the
reader " Ill substitute TELEGRAM HER-
AID" for .EagIe'' and . Eagle" for "TELE-
GRAN HERALD" he VIII have the exact
attitude of the management of tins
paper toward our evening contempt
rary, but the Eagle has seen tit 10 make
a very malicious attack and We must
reply.
In the first place on council proceed
ings and marshal sales the bids OF the
A. b. Turner Company and the Tele-
gram Publishing Company were eX-
actly the same per square and descrip-
ton respectively. The only difference
would BE N the use of fat or lean type
but with that We VIII deal later.
On other advertising the 4. Il. Turner
Company bid 10 cents per folio and
the Telegram Publishing Company III
cents per folio. The A. B. Turner
Company would furnish 125 copies of
the proceedings IN pamphlet form for
sl.75 per session of the council, and
the Telegram Publishing Company
wanted S1.90 per session.
Vow 800 foliOs, 80 said competent
judges, would be a fair estimate of the
number Of fohos Of advertising used
by the city IN one year. There was a
difference of y cents per folio, which
would amount during the year TO
$3.50. There was Il difference of 10
cents per session of council on the pam
phlets. Fsfty-two sessions would
amount t. $50. This, with the differ
ence Of $3.50 on the advertising would
give difference Of 5000 in favor of
the Eag'e on the face of the figures.
Their friends and advocates claimed
only from $50 90 So on the year. So 1t
VIII be seen that there was not any very
large amountof difference between the
two bids. There Is aquestion of equity
and Justice IN the matter which the
Eagie tries todwellupon, and one thatwe
alsodO not care 10 have overlooked. The
charter Of the city OF Grand Rapids
says the printing shall be let 10 the low
est bidder. and the TELEGRAN- HERALD
claimed and s6l claims that the
Common Council could not, in
justice, award the printing TO any
one else. The Telegram Publishing co.
was the lowest bidder for two reasons
First, and mainly because of our very
much larger circulation. and this part
Of the question the Ea7ls entirely ig-
nores on al occasions. second, We
claimed 20 the aldermen that the nom
parel type in use on the TrIE5RAw-
HEEA1D was rde leaner than that Ia
use on the Eagle. The rErEGRAN-HERALn
is charged with doctorng al advertise
ment and trying to deceive the alder.
men. THIS Ne faflv and eunuatical us