Daily press. [volume] (Newport News, Va.) 1896-current, 1909-03-12
STATEMENT TO PUBLIC
Merchants Association Explains Its
Complaint Agpinst School Board.
LOCAL DEALERS NOT GIVEN CHANCE.
Trustees Resolution Characterized as
Misleading. and Unjust to Newport
News Merchants-Larseiy Attended
Meeting Of the Organization.

Another discussion OF the recent
action OF the schc,i board in prchas'
ing tvpewriters and ether supplies for
use in the city schools in Norfolk took
p,nce during the regular meeting OF
the Merchants Association last might.
The session was one OF the best AT
tended ever held by the organization
and though various matters CT regular
business were considered and dlSioS'
ed OF but the school beard matter
was the chief object Of interest,
The result of the discussion WAS
the ur'inimous a,lCitoI CT the i2llow'
ing statement. which had been '.Hr"'
!. AIRED by committee appointed by
President Meyers for the purYcSf:
The statement.
Newport News, Va.
March II. 1909.
To the Press OF Newport News;
Preference to y resolution passed
lv the school board of this city on
March .. 1909. in its regular session
and which was published in the Daily
Press edition of March 10. 1909. the
Merchants Association desires to en-
phatically protest against the state.
mcnts as set icrth in Section OF
said resolution and to take exceptions
to the following declarations therein:
~. As for patronizing home peo-
ME. this is always the wish or the
hoard but the home offers were no'
below so for these machines new or
40 per cent. higher than the price pnid
and wa do not feel justified in paving
that nricc when il meant the DEFINITE
loss to the city of $l2o. As Tor Ine
tables and chairs. these were turntsh'
cd nv one of the typewriter concerns
ut exact cost. as further inducemeht
to rs To buy some of its machines.
The Merchants Association here
nv poes on record and submits the FOL
,owjnn for the consideration OF the
public.
II. The typewritcrs were not pr
chased ur,icr prorcr competition.
- The school hoard. although re
1uested 10 do 50. has not pron",.u
any evidence that advertisements
were made for these purchases. e''he,
in the local newspapers or by P2s'ea
public notices. o
a. That only one local firm sue
ceeded in submitting bid. Two other
firms OF this city desired TO snDhi'
a bid but were not afforded the o?-
pOrtunity. J..
That the merchants at large. III
this city. did not know that these p"r-
chases were to be made. until a1ter
,he contracts were closed. and hau
M adequate opportunity OF so know
ing.
- That the bids as submitted d!
q, local trm were based upon the shp-
plv of new machines.
e That the Smith Premier ana
the Remington typewri'ers as supphed
nv an out CT town firm to the schoo'
hoard were secondhand machines.
- That this method OF advernse-
ment aud conditions OF supply worked
an unjust discrimination against the
local merchants.
IS. That il is unfair and de'rimen-
tai TO the business interests OF t"i'
community tc publish that the New,
mort News merchants were 40 per ceu'
higher than the Norfolk merchants
when the local merchants bid on the
basis of supplying new machines anu
tho Norfolk firm was allowed 10 sup
NV second hand typewriters in part
simply. This comparison has a ten
dency to hurt the business s'andihs
OF orr local firms.
% That the purchase Of the type
writer talles and chairs sholld nave
been made a separate purchase ana
advertised fer separately and distinct
" instead of being secured Jointly
with the typewriiers. without the re-
ceiyal OF even one local bid 1cr s"c''
typewriter furniture.
committee of the Merchants As
SOciaiion