Polk County observer. (Monmouth, Polk County, Or.) 1888-1927, 1912-10-18

! brazen lying about myself, instead of
showing any advantages to accrue to
| oregon by his proposed scheme of
state ownership, union control, and
! fiat salaries for everybody on time,
instead of having the work done un-
der a piece-work schedule.
! | shall not oppose the idea of hav-
! ing the state name a committee or
commission of competent commercial
printers, aided by foremen of print
| ing houses to prepare a schedule of
/ rates for the state to pay. On the
! contrary, l shall favor the proposal,
as | have long done. 1t will then be
/ found, by comparison, that the pres
ent rates are entirely fair in their
workout though now the state print
er receives too much on some work
and too little on others.
When Harris writes he always deals
with profits, real or imaginary, but
never reveals losses The Salem
Grange committee found him abso-
lutely unreliable and untrustworthy,
and the Grange withdrew its endorse
ment of the bill rigged up by himself
and others Also Portlands typo
/ SIupHlttl ullbll has just uCNlliiSht
October s, to pledge their moral or
financial support to his bill. Also,
the Taxpayers league, of Portland.
has decided to oppose the adoption Of
Harris scheme at the polls and to
work for repeal of the bill. Thus
does opposition develop against the
measure which Harris and his little
bunch Of Socialist printers succeeded
in getting through the legislature on
the last day of the last session., when
no one knew the hidden purposes of
the conspirators.
During the session of 1911 was in
a California hospital and not expected
ever to live to return to Oregon and
by order of physicians all knowl-
edge as to what was going on in Ore
CONS legislature was kept from me.
or l should then have shown up the
crookedness Of Harris scheme as my
experience during some years in the
office had Afforded me knowledge Of
the objects Of Harris, Hill, Godfrey
and the rest.
You are right, Mr.. Editor in an
other respect: Every board commits
sion or department should have to
preparation; then each would seek for
economy. I have steadily sought to
have that rule prevail. and it now
prevails as to no less than thirty
seven boards. commissions, depart
ments and institutions. But there is
great opposition TO this in certain
quarters. where large quantities of
printing are desired. hut where the
head official desires to have il appear
that he has been economical. Some
Of the autagOnism 10 me here grows
out Of my effort to have the rule pre-
vail of charging the printing to the
proper department or institution.
Then. too. the state printer and the
auditor should biennially report the
amount Of printing for each depart I.
ment or Institution. for the informa-
tion Of the legislature and the public.
I am unalterably opposed 10 any
secrecy as 10 expenditure Of public
money; hut Expert Harris has just
ruled against this idea. under the
clause IN section 1881 ~ Lords ore .
sou laws. which authorizes the ex-
pert 60 examine copy Of annual OF
biennial reports and cut out such
portions as are OF doubtful public
utility. lie therefore orders that the
Of expenditures OF public
money. long a part of the Secretary
% states biennial report. shall not be
printed What Is 20 be covered up by
his ruling. I do not know; but shall
secure and print the record as &c ex-
penditures Tor printing There shall
b. no secrecy about my department
The Observers readers viii notice
hat never figure Is given by Harris
md others as 20 economy under the
.ystem they are putting up their
money O. promote. And they are in
iignaut az having facts given as 70
De cost On our neiEhbor state. Cali