Daily capital journal. (Salem, Or.) 1896-1899, 1898-05-27
LYMAN REPLIES TO ACKERMAN.

The fact, that Mr.. Ackerman did
actually, 10 December following, vote
in the manner suggested by this com
Hittss, and tsGs make his actions i5-
telligible, indicates that he retained
his vote 70 u>e H. in the interest Of
this compay. His admission now
that he used IL for the American
Book Company ''ticket" is frank and
ends all dispute on that point. He
offers no objection to my statement.
He offers 10 mitigation Of this act
the following:
/. That IL his vote indicated bim t.
be nnder the Influence Of the Ameri-
can Book Co then miDe indicateS that
1 was under the influenCe Of syndicate
headed by Ginu & 90. AS to this
would first say it rests with Mr. ACk
ermau tO DrDy that there Is any such
syndicate. ron the contrary by infOf
| nation which l outsider reliable b.
lieve that the syndicate sppkeu Of b.
Mr. Ackerman. one composed Of the
publishing houses for VII sc books my
vote vas cast, has no eXiste ice. In-
deed this init nation OF Mr. Acker-
mans is 81 loosely stated as 10 include
10 such "syudicai " the American
Book Co. itself. But at all events II
ne allows tnat the vote is an indIca-
tion OF preference this as surely binds
him 10 the American BOOK Cu. rs he
would have IL inferred I was houud To
the "syndiciie." II IL is forced TO
this am quite prepared to say that
as consci. tious educator 1 preferred
the looks which lai ny v"ie to
thoss which had the vote % Mr.
Ackeriaar and would gladly leave
judgment to all competent edrcat0rs
Second, would also be GLAD to sa,
that my vote was cast with a definite
purpose TO divide the school book bus
iness among the best publishers 50 as
70 give them substantial reasons for
doing business in our state. and thus
to keep open competition. 1t will be
observed that by my vote the Ameri-
can Book Co. was also accorded foot
mold in Oregon; as in addition to the
VARIABLE privilege OF selling dictiOn-
aries more than half Of the Supple
mentary Reading for which 1 voted
we're publications Of the same COM
parry. The only possible chance left
TO the county superintendent TO re-
duce prices at that time was to
pursue policy that would tend 10
secure open competition.
Third, would say that the accu-
sation Of Mr.. Ackerman that IL he
voted for the book company then l
voted for the syndicate. would be
very much like saying in the time Of
the late war, "Well, IL am for JEFF
Davis then you are for Abe Lincoln;
SO what is the difference ?'
The fact Is that Mr.. Ackerman's 's
parallel las no force unless it implies
that there is no difference between
the American Book Co. monopoly and
other book publishers. From such
obtain believe that there is a differ
ence. Perhaps owing TO It's monopo-
listic features, this company has been
led into methods for which ii has
been repeatedly accused OF prac-
tices, and even Of crimes, such as
haye never been laid, so far as
know, to the charge OF the other
publishing houses. IL has been well
said that an individual has soul, but
a corporation has none; and that a
combination OF corporations not only
has no conscience but denies its exer-
else to its employees.
II the practices, or crimes. which
have been charged so generally, and
which have never been disproYed,
against the agents OF the American
Book Co, were in like manner charged
against CHM & Co. should also be as
anxious to deny any possible con-
nection with CHM & Co, as my op
ponent is now Ito deny any possible
connection between himself and the
American Book Co But a very few
months before the vote was taken IN
1894, there was published authentically
oyer their own signatures, the report
OF the special committee on schools
appointed by the committee OF one
hundred. Speaking OF the American
Book Co. this committee charges: "In
other states this company has In It's
effort TO obtain = complete monopoly
resorted TO the most flagrant bribery
and corruption OF public officials. "
Continuing and coming nearer home
IL cites that In the state OF Washing
ton j. w. Womack and II. l.. Ed.
wards, agents OF the combination,
were, with NJ. @. SulliVan and @, o.
Eames, on August l, 1890, indicted
for attempting TO bElbe member OF
the state board OF education. The
committee says the indictment was
afterwards smothered and dismissed
without trial, but they had examined |
into the matter carefully and could |
not avoid the conclusion that this |
was deliberate attempt att
bribery. Never TO my knowledge haYe
either the committee, Thos. N.
Strong,S. Z. Josephi aud @. VI. Wood
ward, as authors, or the Oregonian as
publisher,of such an Infamous charge,
II untrue, been prosecuted for libel by
CaDfaln Edwards