The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1907-09-02
Rim according to the requirements of
tho State law.
Cost HID Increased.


there is no restriction except as 10
limit of maximum prices TO be chargea,
will always tend to keep prices peloW
the maximum because OF corn S,a.n ~
tho Union has ever assigned to one
concern the exclusive privilege OF sell
ing school desks within It's borders
School furniture manufacturers ths TT
fore Ind no reason for believing that
competition in the sale of school furh,-
ture would not continue in virginia
in the future as in the past, or tna t
school boards would be denied the
right OF buying such goods as best
suit their needs. in the open market
and at competitive. prices. aiowever'
the Virginia School supply Go dnsi,, y
jobber of school desks, entertained no
mistaken ideas US TO the nature OF the
bid required. 49,. al,
school officials and all fair-minded citic
gens of Virginia, first, that the bid OIL
the Virginia school Supply COMPANY PAM
was. dated May, 29th nearly three
facturers in general We're officially in
formed that bids would be received
second that the Virginia School supply
Company had Just been ORGANIZED, Pc,
Inc less than three months old at the
time the contract was made; and th1ru
the Virginia School supply COMPANY
was apparently the only bidder having
a correct understanding of the lnteh-
lions of the State board.
Letters and Bids.
A further insight into the character
of this transaction may be learne ta
from the fact that while the sta.e
board claims to have in ITS posSsS ,s.,n1,
aompany. under date of May goth, The
A. ii. Andrews Company has In lts
possession letter under date OF June
18th. signed by Preston Belyin, VINO SnSoa Is
supply Company. In which he wrote
rs follows. ~,
THE A. II. Andrews Company chi
Dear slrs,-The state Board 90, Of
took up the question of ,a scn1ol
supplies. They found In n, looking King
tied up on some things until next
FEBRUARY or March. and were
rather of the opinion that 1t wou tn
be wise TO defer action on an ui aT,
that u' 10 more more definite finish
on school desks. They passed a
resolution requesting other desk
companies TO appear. before them
at their meeting to be held. about
Jllv ist. to prove why their per-
,nits TO sell desks in this state
should not be Cancelled; ihere -
scarcely desk house who has done
any business in this State that mas
not disregarded some section OF the
instructions of the State Board oil
Educat ion 1pu are nv -
The significance of this letter is that
Mr.. Belvfn had made application in ms
own rame. early in March: 1907, ,o or
the exclusive agency in Virginia Oh
HE school desks manufactured by me ,s
a. H Andrews Company. However. Mr.
Belviu had dropped the matter when
he learned that The A III. andrews
contract with him, by means OF
which il might have been deprived, at
the option OF Mr.. Belvtn, of the priv
lege of doing business In school iurnl-
tnre in the State of Virginia Tor u
considerable period of time
After taking into consideration the
prices which are being quoted on
school desks in Virginia, by Inc ~. ii
turers as compared with those specl'
fled in the State school desk contract
school officers will be able to Judge fol
themselves as to whether me zen.
the Virginia School Supply Company
would be TO secure for the schools OF
the state lower prices than those OF
fered in the general market. or
monopoly of the school furniture busl-
ness in Virginia into the hands of one
company. The future only can deter
mine whether school boards will sub
nit to coercion and willingly pay fol-
i. school desks higher prices than those
at which goods of equal or superior
quality can be obtained in the oper
Attorncys' Opinions
However, without considering the
Interesting circumstances connected
with the birth of this contract, doubts
REGARDING its legitimacy are e CO.. urn
the State board claims authority fol
awarding a State contract for schoo
desks is very indefnite-so indefinite
In fact that an unusual stretch OF
imaginatiop is required to find in. II
my reason upon which such actor
might fairly" be based. The law citet
Is section 1888, paragraph 6, Of tbs
Two of the most eminent attorneys
OF the State of Virginia 10 Lane ant
Cary Ellis Stern) have given an opin-
ion on this law, part of which is as
"'rho law is silent as to tho
duty of the board to enter into
contract for school furniture and
presumed that, had the Legisla-
ture intended that the State board
should make contracts for the fur
nishing of school furniture and ed
vocational appliances, it would have
said so, Just as it did in regard to
entering into. contract for text
books. Applying the legal maxim,
that the inclusion of one is the
exclusion of another, we come to
the conclusion that the law-making
power OF the State did not intend
NHil tilc Iol6lt DOdlu SllOulu make
any such contract as it has made
with the Virginia School Supply
Company. Our understanding is
that the district boards have the
power to make contracts for fur
niture such as is prescribed by
the State Board of Education, and
we take ii that, so long as the dis
trict boards contract for such
school furniture as the State Board
OF Education has selected, the dis
trict boards have the right to con-
tract with any manufacturing COM
pany they may see Mt"
Some More History.
Why should any school board unde
these circumstances feel called upo
to pay higher prices for school furni
ture than are asked for goods of equi
or superior quality in the open mar
ket?
The city of Norfolk, Virginia, earl
in July 1907. placed its order fo
school desks with The A. II. Andrew
Company, finding their proposal fo
the furnishing of such desks NOR
favorable than that of any other bic
der. and saving thereby more tina
1900 on the prices at which the Stat
contract was awarded to the Virsinj
School Supply Company. State ST
perintendent of Public Instruction
ID. Eggleston, Jra refused to appro,
ntran oil