Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1905-02-25
STATE PRINTING.
Strong Corroborative Evil
dence Offered.
PRACTICAL Printers Declare Thai
Present Prices Are Low.
The Hearing Will Continue at 8 O'clock
Monday Evening.

inc nearing before the special leyis-
iitiNc toIninit-"e on stat, printing wa
'"'itiEucd. Friday Afternoon, and at 6
"tio'k an adjournment was made UNI
III T. NJ, Monday. when Judge Fos-
YER representing the opposition to the
state printer ard the State printing
law. VIII Introduced several witnesses.
Friday afternoons session. like those
= thursday afternoon and evening
Mas In the hall cf the House which was
crowded to the limit. AS on the previ-
Gus cay. Hon. Orvilln d. baker of this
city was present as Scnio" counsel fc!
STATE printer. and he conducted the eX-
amina ton of the witnesses who were
introduced. These witnesses were
stephen Berry Ct Portland, who has
audited the bills for the state printing
"lth tn" exception III Il short perio,l
Tor the past IS years: LcWIS a. Wyinan
u! i"Ston. the manager of the firm
which has done the Massachusetts
state printing for IS years; Herbert II.
"hltc. the manager OF the University
Press. Cambridge. Mass; George d.
LorlnS of Portland Charles f.. Will
lialns of Portland and arnold II. Jones
O.: Rockland. All are Practical printers
o. many years experience and their
testimony corroborated in every detail
the testimony OF Mr.. Flynn, Thursday
afternoon and evening, regarding the
cost of work and the usagcs of print
"rS. They Were Il unit in declaring that
The prices paid by tn" State of Maine
tor us printing 1ic much lower than
those generally prevailing. for tho same
classes Of work. Their evidence was
convincing and conclusive to all who
heard it, and Judge Poster wisely re-
Trained from any extended attempts d
crosse examining them.
Before these witnesses were in
PRODUCED. Mr.. Flynt was recalled and
asked Il feW questions by Judge Eos
ter, along the same lines as on the pre-
ViouS evening. These questions related
to the printing of cuts. the engrOssing
of bills the cost of envelopes, etc. and
little of Importance was brought out.
The Judge failed in his attempt to show
that work has been done by the state
printer for private parties al Il lower
figure than is received for State work.
He instanced one case where q cents
leigh & Flynt by Mr.. Ladd an Au-
gusta job printer. Mr.. Flynt. however,
showed that this was merely for type
on the galley and did not include any
of the other operations necessary to
prepare il for the press involving an
additional expense of from l. to 20
cents a thousand ems which was borne
by Mr.. Ladd. IN answer to IL question
by Chairman Heselton as to an item
Of $500 in the State treasurcrS report
for proof reading and tnerossing
clerk" TO which Judge Foster had earl
Ter called attention. Mr.. Flynt cX-
planned that this was for work done in
the enGrossing department Of the sec
rotary of states office with which the
State printer has absolutely nothing
to do. Mr.. Flynt added that this WAS
no saving to the public printer in the
matter OF proof reading. as the expense
of the messenger service and the delay
incurred offset the advantage of the
proof reading.