Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1915-02-16

printed Lnde- each q TWO contracts
with re State. II other words. &C
cord-ng 10 our down TiTe- coLtenEso-
-zry, = Is all right to- the State %
pay -Eice +or on. piece OF TorE-
W2-e-viLe Sentinel
II striking Though rot startl!ng) con-
r-az- with the perfectly fair and cou--
teoUs discussion Of the printing mat
ter By Attorney General Pattangall is
the foregoing comment, which is en-
t:reiy n keeping with the SentiaeTs
/ policy ot decsiving its readers when
ever the r1is-statement will serve is
end II E Political argument.
! The keanebec Journal never stated.
never p-otesSed, nor agreed 10 the
above conclusion. The. order intro
: duced By Democratic Senator Garcelon
called tor the printing Of the State
Auditors reports for present legisla-
tive use. The printing TO be done by
the Naterv.:le Sentinel. later on. for
general distribution and in perulan men:
binding, is for another and dis,inNt
purpose and under q separate con-
tract.
The Attorney General claimed that
because Of the fact that this report
was included in the contract which the
Governor and Council had made with
the WaIe-v!lle Sentinel. under which
contract $3.50 copies, Gnstead Of the
500 copies required for legislative use,.
were usually printed and bound in per-
Uanent binding for general distribu-
ton, the legislature exceeded its au-
thoriry. He contended that the order
ot>the Legislature necessarily inter
fe-ed with the right CT the Governor
and Council to order this report Of the
/ Wateville Sentinel. The Journals
claim was. first that the legislature
; was authorized to order this report,
or any other document printed for II.
own use, and It quoted the Attorney
Generals opinion. promulgated about
ten days ago. as its authority: second.
that al! the circumstances connected
with the order pointed TO the conclu-
sion that the legislative intention was
that the documents were 20 be printe-,
for its own use.
The Legislative printers neither a6-
vised the printing Of these reports ry
the legislature, nor were they even
aware Of the fact that they had beea
ordered printed until the order was re-
ceived in the usual course of bust
ness. Neither DO they assume the leg
islative action vas either wise or un-
wise. AS contractors with tie State,
neither the book printers nor the legis.
! lative printers have the occasion or
the right to question the decision Of
the Legislature. on the one hand, nor
OF the Governor and Council, on the
other. to order the printing called for
IN the classes OF which they respective
~ have charge. AS newspapers, how
ever. both the Waterville Sentinel and
the Kennebec Journal have the right.
and sometimes the duty. Of legitimate
comment and criticism Of either lesis-
la,ive or executive action
So far as the present question Is
concerned, IL Is obvious that Il the re-
ports are not needed for present legis-
lative use, the cost Of completing the
work can be saved by ordering further
work stopped, as the legislative print
ers have held Il in allegiance since we
had knowledge of Attorney General
Pattangail's opinion. pending further
legislative action thereon
Thea a-a -.uss Indian F-r-ore in <As