Omaha daily bee., 1897-06-17
MOORE REFUSES TO PLEAD
E1-Auditor Arraigned Before Judge Hall at
Lincoln Yesterday.
NE STANDS MUTE BEFORE THE COURT
Attorneys for Defense object to the
Anformnt tion. but Their Motion IL
OycrruIed and Plea Of Not
Guilty Entered.

LINCOLN. June Is.-CSpecial Telegram.)-
Ex-Auditor Eugene Moore was arraigned be
fore District Judge Hall this afternoon. on
the three counts OF the old Information
charging him embezzling s23,2OS.O5 state
funds. A. W. Field appeared for Mr. Moore
and objected to being required to plead be
cause the first. second, third, nth. seventh
and eighth counts hRvs heretofore been
quashed aud no new or amended Information
filed. The court overruled the motion, and
had the other three read. At the conclusion
OF the reading Of each the court asked
Moore how he pleaded. Moore each time
turned to his attorney, who declined to plead
for the reasons assigned The court then
wrote in his docket that as the defendant
stood mute the court, in accordance with law,
therefore entered plea Of not guilty for
him.
The supreme court has handed down about
forty decisions and Is still 10 session. Among
the opinions filed is an affirmation OF the de-
cision OF the district court in the case OF
School District No. 5, Of Douglas county
against J. W Thomas receiver Of the Mid
land State bank. In the case OF Matilda VIII
liams against the City Of Omaha the court
holds that a party purchasing a lot which
abuts on a street the grade OF which has
been established, must improve the lot in
conformity with the established grade, and
IL the improvements are in reference to nat
ural grade the lot owner cannot recover dam
ages caused by the street being worked TO
the established grade.
No decisions in the charter cases have
been handed down. but II is quite likely that
the matter will be disposed OF tomorrow,
before the court adjOurns for the summer.
MUDDLE OVER STATE PRINTING.
The action OF the State Printing board in
letting the contracts for printing mostly un-
der the old law and ignoring the principal
features Of the new state printing law
passed by the last legislature gives rise to
some curious complications. The new law
was house roll No. 571. II repealed the old
law and also repealed the provisions which
designated legal newspapers" leaving the
state without legal newspaper law. The
present printing board recognizes the new
act so far as the newspaper part is concerned
advertising for bids in newspapers which, un-
der the old law, would not have been legal" 9"
Then the balance OF the business Of the board
is done practically under the old law, all
that part Of house roll No. 57l relating to
the appointment and duties of a state print
ing expert being ignored. The question ma
turaly arises. II that part Of the new law
which was considered the most important part
OF the bill when it passed is to be re-
pealed by the board. why should not that
part relating 10 newspapers be also repealed
by them, and the advertising, as well the
other work OF tine board, be done under the
old statute2
One change provided by house roll No. 57l
was recognized by the board at its recent
meeting The old statute was indefinite as
to whether the printing should be let as a
whole to the lowest bidder, or should be let
in parts to the lowest bidders for the sep
arate parts This gave rise to much contro-
versy. and led to a case in the supreme court
wherein the Woodrur-Dunlap Printing COM
pany claimed Its right TO the contract for
printing all the reports OF the state officers
for the coming two years, because it had
presented the lowest bid on the whole num-
Der. and had only been awarded the contract
for part OF them. House roll No. 571 expressly
provides that the contracts shall be let in
parts. each bidder to get the contract only
upon the item on which his bid is below the
other bidders. The recent contracts for print
ing the house and senate journals session
laws and several miscellaneous reports were
made under these provisions. the work being
divided between the Journal company and
Jacob North & Co. The board, however
simply followed the line mapped out by its
predecessors under the old law.
SUPREME COURT DECISION.
The decision handed down by the supreme
court today in the Woodruff Dunlap case set
ties the controversy as to the provisions OF
the old statute. The court upholds the
position OF the Woodruff Dunlap company. the
syllabus being in the following language:
/, That part Of section q chapter xviii
Compiled Statutes, in which is stated ''The
printing and binding of reports OF state
and all other reports and documents or
dered by the legislature, except such as en-
tSI lHlo anu IoTNl part or the journals,
shall be let in another contract Held. To-
require that the designated work be done
under a single contract and the State
Printing board cannot sever the contract
for such work and award portions Of IL
70 one bidder and other portions to other
bidders
. There is necessary implication in the
law In regard to state printing that the
contracts be awarded to the lowest COM
petent bidder.
3. Where the statute provides that there
be an advertisement for proposals or COM
petltlNe BIDS for the doing pIlbliN
and the awarding of the contracts pur-
suart 10 such bids, the object being TO Sc
cure the work TO be performed as econom-
ically as may be, and the statute contains
a statement that II the first party 10 whom
the contract is awarded fails 10 perfect the
contract, the work may be let 10 the next
lowest bidder, IL requires though not ex-
pressed directly. that the contract be
awarded and let to the lowest bidder I'm
less the statute vests or by reason of the
nature OF the work there rests A discretion
In the officer or board authorized to let
the contract.
4. A provision in the statute or a reserva-
tion in the advertisement Of the right of