The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1909-07-10
uses This Defense in Face Of
The Fact That Withdrawal
Charge Was Not Made by
The Trustees.
TOWNSHIP TRUSTEES
DIDN'T ACCEPT BIDS
Claim Of Baker Regarding Le-
gaIity of Contracts Is
Laughed at by the County
Superintendent.

u a statement made by William L..
Baker OF the school supply firm at In
dianapolis yesterday, he denied that
the bidders withdrew their PROPOSE
tion made to the Wayne county town.
ship trustees the day before. 1t never
had been claimed that the supply COM
spanies withdrew their bids, as they
were not given opportunity to do any
thing but accept the action OF the
trustees, who decided not to accept
sany bids. Baker did not submit his
bid because he claimed he would not
abide by the competitive methods pro-
posed.
Superintendent Jordan today reit-
Grated his statements OF the day before
In which he said Baker admitted there
was an understanding between the
supply companies that they should
agree on a uniform price before sub
mitting bids. Jordan says he does not
| offer the declaration unsubstantiated,
but that the fifteen trustees Of the
county will give the same kind Of an
! account OF the meeting AZ he does.
Jordon's Statement.
Tho claim OF Baker relative to the
legality OF the contracts is laughed
at by the county superintendent. Jor-
f1an says Baker and all other bidders
well understood that contracts for
school supplies were not to b let at
the meeting. He says the meeting was
called and the supply men asked to en-
tsr bids, 20 that = scheduled rate could
b obtained. Each contract would
have to be made for each individual
! township and his advisory board. Jor-
dan believes Baker and his associates
have been seeking subterfuge behind
which to retreat since the exposure of
ltheir attempted connivance.
Attention IL called to Bakers claim
j In the interview that an example Of
Iunderbidding was afforded In this city.
Baker charges Steele & Draper, the In
lsurgent member Of the supply group,
ipresented 4 bid on examination books
that was below the cost OF manufac-
ture. But tho trustees knew nothing
OF this. They did not know any OF
Steele & Draper's figures. Now the
! trustees would like to know how 1t
happened II there had not been an at
| tempted agreement or understanding
| between the bidders thta Baker secur-
ed information concerning Steele &
Draper's figures. Not single price
on anything was given consideration
| by the trustees. as they rejected all
bids upon learning an attempted COM
lbination had been proposed to the de-
kriment Of fair competition.
Bakers Statement.
In his interview yesterday Baker
said:
| There IL not q word Of truth in the
lstAtement that we withdrew our bids
ut Richmond" said w. L. Baker
when ssen at his school supply house
Nm South Capitol avenue. There was,
In the flrst place, nothing that could
'possibly be called bidding at Rich
lmond yesterday. and In the second
Iplace, We did not file bids and with.
ldraw them. It is true that Superin-
|tendent Jordan gathered In his fifteen
township trustees and that they sub.
mitted list Of supplies to us to give
them prices on, but they did not indi-
poate how much they wished or what
I've would be required to do They
wanted US to give our list prices, and
this decided l would not do, for var
l1ous reasons.
In the first place the Indiana laws
'are very explicit as to how these town
shiprsehool supplies shall be contract.
ed for. The trustee and his three ad-
visors shall 1t is stated by the law. let
the contract Jordan for political pur-
poses. probably. was trying another
plan and several Of the township trus.
tees were not In full accord with him
for his process was In violation of the
law.
Why He Did Not Bid.
THE reason that did not bid was
because the courts have recently dc
cided that whoever sells goods to town
ship trustees must take into consid
eration their limited powers to buy
goods and they must be governed ac
cordingly. The courts having held
that. and the proceedings taken yes
terday being wholly irregular and no,
according to law. did not personally
feel justified IN taking the risk on
making anything that might be con.
strued as bid on goods. for the rea
son that feared collection under the
law Some may have taken this risk
Of collection on small order, but
did not want to take the risk on sucs
! large one. We did not flle bids
that Is positive. ! called attention tc
the fact thnt 1t would be especially
dangerous at this time because the new
public accounting law Is coming into
lContiAusd on Page 9even.l
=