Webster City freeman. [volume] (Webster City, Hamilton County, Iowa) 1884-1946, 1915-08-17


knows it. In referring to the di-
vision of the city printing years ago
between the Freeman, Graphic-Her-
aid, Tribune and Journal the sena-
tor says:
cat the time this division was
made the editor of the Freeman and
Tribune took one share each for his
papers; one share for the Journal in
which he was large stakeholder at
the time, and one share for the
Graphic, on which he held a mort
gage at that time"
This is about as far from the truth
as it is possible to get. When that
arrangement was made, G. D. HELEN
owned the Tribune, Furman futile
owned the Journal, company Of
prominent democrats owned the
Graphic-Herald and Hunter & Hunt
er owned the Freeman, and this
writer had no financial interest
whatever in any other paper and
held no mortgage upon any of them.
Later, when c. D. HELEN withdrew
from the Freeman-Tribune and Sc
cured an interest in the Journal and
H. P. ROBBIE had control of the
Graphic-Herald, they went to the
council without the knowledge of
the Freeman Tribune and induced
the council to cut out the Tribune,
giving the printing to the other
three at the price formerly paid the
four, which shows that the council
considered three papers as good as
four. At that time this writer held
a mortgage on the Graphic-Herald
and no part of it was ever paid I'M
til the Graphic-He passed into
the hands of Senator Chase. If you
doubt that the senator paid, just ask
Wesley Martin.
The senator asks if the Freeman
Tribune is in favor of competitive
bids on county printing. OF course
that has nothing to do with the city
printing. The Freeman-Tribune
will say, however, that if the board
of supervisors should be placed in
the position the city council was and
should call the publishers before it
and tell them that only one paper
was hereafter to do the printing the
would be in favor
of competitive bids and would insist
upon it. The senator's conclusion
that the movement in favor of the
city manager plan is due to the city
printing controversy is only moon
shine. The Freeman-Tribune had
absolutely nothing to do with the in
Of the present movement.
AS it understands it, Geo. S. Barner
took the initiative and Mr.. Barner
has never consulted the Freeman
Tribune about it. The senator's
charge that the whole movement is
in the interest of the Freeman-Trib-
une is an insult to the men who cir
culated the petitions asking for the
special election and an insult to the
voters who signed the petitions, 1t
comes to the Freeman Tribune that
Senator Chase has said he was for
the manager plan until the Freeman
Tribune came out for it, or words to
that effect. Is that fact, senator?
If it is a fact, isn't that stultitica-
ton of your ballot? If the manager
plan is a good thing the people of
Webster City ought to have the adj
vantage of it regardless of who is
for or against it, hadn't they?
The thing that gave impetus to
the manager plan at this time, in the
judgment of the Freeman-Tribune,
was the arbitrary action of the
council in attempting to override
Mayor Banks in his rights and du-
ties in the matter of the appoint
ment of a superintendent of the
electric light plant, situation I'M
paralleled in the history of cities of
the United States, so far as the Free
has been able to asCer-
tain. After increasing the bond of
the superintendent to $1,000, and
after the appointee had secured the
bond and it had been accepted, the
council undertook to abolish the Of
flee and put man in charge with
out bond. That, we believe, hasten
ed the movement for the city mana
ger plan. But it would have come
anyhow, because those who have
given consideration to the question
are convinced that it is the best
system obtainable.
In winding up its effusion the
Herald relieves itself of this signifi-
cant statement:
"P. S. The city manager plan al
lows the commissioners to select an
official paper at legal rates. Com