Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1906-08-14

whether or not provision should be
made for their permanent preserva-
ton. after they had served the pur-
poses of the law and the bills which
| accompanied them had been finally set
| tied. The State Printer never re-
ceived a cent. from the State eNcent
upon bills approved by the State audi
tor to whom samples and receipts had
| been presented for each and every
| item. The printing committee of the
Legislature considered this matter IN
detail at the last session. ana
in its unanimous report signed py
it's Democratic member as well as the
| Republican members, stated its con-
illusions rs follows:
1T is proper to say here, in justice
to the printer and to the auditor. that
| there has been no violation by either OIL
| them of any law of the State so lar
as the investigation has acquainted US
with the facts. Printing bills payahle
out of the general appropriation that
should have been submitted to the
auditor have been 50 submitted,
properly audited by him and paid out
| Of the treasury at statute rates"
| This was the unanimous conclusion
of the legislative committee which had
Ispent the greater part of the winter in
Investigating the office of State Printer.
They found and found unanimously
that he had faithfully and fully
observed every requirement Of the law.
| But perhaps Mr.. Davis may criticise
1.-THE law itself for not having made
some provision for the perpetual pre-
scrvation of the samples Of the State
work, and receipts therefor, which had
been duly passed upon, as required by
law. bv the State auditor Hon.
Stephen Berry. of Portland, and paid
for by the Governor and council on the
basis Of his reports to them But the
fact remains that no Democratic men,
her Of the Legislature of 1895
eyer suggested the need or desir-
ability of any such provision and
| the law, AS approved March 26 of that
year received in its final passage the
votes Of every one Of them. 50 much
! for the attempt to mislead the public
, regarding the matter of vouchers for
the public printing under the old law
establishing the office and defining the
duties Of the State Printer.
2 Mr.. Davis makes the statement
that in the hearing before the special
i Legislative committee of the last
: Legislature to consider the matter of
n State printing "it was brought out that
they CRurIrigh & TlynO have offered
: to ~ private composition ~ 20 cents
per thousand, which they were charging
a the State ~ cents per thousand for.
g Now we assume that Mr.. Davis would
not desire to knowingly misreprcscnt
:. Burl.igh & tlynt in this matter, but 1t
2 is only just to them to state that the
g above assertion is absolutely Incorrect
= The composition for which the State
: raid BurlciEh & F'ynt AZ cents per
q thousand WAS book composition. made
! I'D into pages and justified into forms
in readiness for the press. Burleigh 4
!. FLINT meyer offered to do such com
position for a private party for 20 cents
. n thousand. or any figure approaching
- it, The absolute absurdity Of such an
i assertion will appear when We state
u that it was brought out in testimony
+bn IerigI4fiyp I,ornmittpp bI
leading printers representing different
:, sections Of the Stat" that tn" prevailing
ii plirc for this class Of composition ii
\, Maine was 80 to 50 cents pei
n Davis mean by stating that it app"arec
To in testimony that Hur"igh & Flyn
had Offered to do such composition f"
a ~ cents q thousand ems? 1t is onl!
10 tlir "a him to state that he prObabl!
n confused with the book composition 70
il the State printing, an offer which
Rurleigh & F1ynt made IL brothc
~ publisher to do some newspaper com
III position for him for 20 cents per thou
re Davis should have been fair enough t
at have stated the further facts brouEh
to out in cstimony-that this newSpape
w composition WAS not made up int
lg pages or justified into forms but wa
ed to be delivered to the publisher 70
e whom il was to be- done on the galley
NJ precisely as it came from the machines
ng and that the correspondence which VA
as submitted in testimony showed that /
It's doing this cheap newspaper compost
~ ton for him Burl"igh & F1ynt dls
e. tinctly stated to him that there wa
OF absolutely nothing whatever in it f
he them at the price named and that tn"
IN cid it purely as a matter of accom-
es mediation for a brother publisher.
at So much for the false claim tn
or Rurleigh & F1ynt have directly, or II