The Courier. (Genoa, Nev.) 1899-1904, 1901-01-11
The County Printing.

ty Commissioners, Messrs. Rodenbah
and Johnson, are carrying things with
a pretty high hand. At the December
meeting of the Board they refused to
advertise for bids TO do the county |
printing and last Monday they ag in
refused to let the COURIER bid on the
work and gave the Record contract
to do the printing this year for $240
This was done without consulting the
COURIER, and the proprietor was pres
ent and presented petition signed by
"a taxpayers, representing half the tax
able property in the county and ask
ing that the printing be given to the
COURIER. But the Board gave us no
chance TO put in a bid and gave the
Record as much if not more than the
printing will amount to at the full rate
allowed by law. 1t is more than twice
the sum the COURIER received for do
ing all the county printing during the
year we had the contract, from April l,
1899, to April |, 1900, and more than
twice the sum we are willing to do it
for this year.
1t has been stated that the COURIER
received $241 during the year it had
the contract, but this is serious mis-
take. The COURIER was paid just
$l12.60 for county printing during that
year. This was for advertising, print
ing the county tax list and all job work
required, including number of legal
blanks such as will not be needed this
year. And $112.6O was the entire sum
paid by the county for printing during
the year.
A claim of $50 was allowed Mr.. Lamy,
but it was for printing done months
before the contract was let. A claim
of $128.75 was also allowed the COURIER
on the first Monday in April, 1899
the day we received the contract-but
this was for work performed in the
previous quarter, the principal item of
which was publishing a description of
forty pieces of property, most of it in
Smith Valley, which was advertised
for sale for delinquent taxes during the
contest over the county boundary line.
This was work out of the usual order
and work that will not have to be done
again. Add that $12875 to the SIP
we did receive and you have the
amount it has been wrongfully claimed
we were paid for printing done during
the year we had the contract.
The past year the Record had the
contract to do the advertising and
print the registry list, but the COURIER
printed the registry list also by consent
of the Commissioners and was paid
for it,
The entire amount paid for printing
to both papers during Mr.. Lamy's con-
tract, just completed, was $3.50 43, but
$227.20 of this was for printing the of
fetal and sample ballots, the poll
books, tally lists, cards of instruction,
the registry list in both papers and
election advertising which will not be
required this year. When this sum is
substracted from the total amount paid
for printing, $l03.23 is left as the
amount paid for the regular printing
and advertising which will have to be
done this year. Not quite $240, is it?
And that sum represents the amount
paid to both papers, less the amount
chargeable to election printing.
To be sure both papers printed the
tax list but only one list has been paid
for, and that one is the one that was
not used and is now supposed to be
shelved in the express office at Genoa
1t is only fair to presume that the
county will pay for the one that was
printed from official copy and used by
the county, but we shall not count it
until it is paid for.
The Board could have had the coun-
ty printing done this year for good
deal less than $240. That sum is more
than was paid for the regular work,
when it was let to bids, in two years.
But two members of the Board were
determined not to let the COURIER bid
on it; that's the whole story in a
nutshell.