Jasper County Democrat, Volume 14, Number 11, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 13 May 1911 — “BIG BUSINESS” METHODS USED [ARTICLE]

“BIG BUSINESS” METHODS USED

In Letting Contract for School Annual This Year? SYSTEMATIC INVESTIGATION Of The Democrat Plant Occurred In the Republican Editorial Rooms—Weird Manner Employed to Eliminate The Democrat From List of Bidders. A Tuesday morning, about 11 o’clock, we were handed a communication written by Mr. Bradshow*, principal of the high school, and signed with him by Cope Hortley, as business manager of the high school annual. This we printed entire but were unable to comment on this “explanation” on account of it being submitted for publication so late.

Occasions arise in the newspaper business when the management would prefer to state the facts and allow the public to form its conclusions without editorial comment, but we feel that, in this case, we owe it to the public at large and to ourselves, as well, to have the parts played by all concerned in this transaction more clearly defined. Mr. Bradshaw has taken it upon himself to act as spokesman, adviser, and, apparently, the one in control of the letting of this contract. The annual, as the public understands it, is presumed to be a student publication (not a faculty advertisement). This being true the student body as a whole were entitled to a vtfice, and the student managers should not have been hampered by prejudiced members of the faculty, whether it was Mr. Bradshaw or anyone else. Mr. Bradshaw stated to us Saturday in the presence of witnesses, that he had informed the Republican of our bid, but latdr changed this statement and said he told them that The Democrat’s bid was lower than theirs and they would have to cut—a most reprehensible act in itself. (He later changes this again in his “statement” and says he told tehm there were two lower bidders, but did not name them to the Republican.) After this, being “on the inside,” the Republican cut their bid to $235 —marked down from $260.

The*? (according to Mr. Bradshaw's oral statement and not until then) did the question of equipment arise. „ In his “explanation,” he says: After systematically investigating the respective equipments of the two local firms and after examining some half-tone prints by The Democrat, this company was dropped from consideration. The “investigation” of The Democrat’s plant was done in the editorial rooms of the Republican. Neither Mr. Bradshaw nor any member of the committee were in our plant to investigate in any manner our equipment. Mr. Bradshaw has never been in our composing and press room in his life to the best of our knowledge. These are facts beyond contradiction. Comment is unnecessary. As-to “examining some halftone -prints by The Democrat,” this must have also been done at the Republican office, if at *hll, as Mr. Bradshaw said nothing whatsoever about specimens of work we had done when in our office. Neither in his “statement” does he say anything about having seen any half-tone work done by the Republican, to judge whether the latter could do any better work than The Democrat. To quote Mr. Bradshaw again : Had we compared the equipment of the two local firms before calling for bids the invitation to The Democrat would not have been extended. - This statement, >on the face of it, appears plain enough, but in view of the fact that no “systematic investigation” was made outside of the one in the Republican editorial rooms, it is rather ambiguous, to say lhe least. Is the

public to infer that had Mr.. Bradshaw talked over our equipment with the Republican editors he would not have wanted other bids? If this is the inference, what’s the answer? The Republican knows and every newspaper in this vicinity knows that neither the Republican nor The Democrat ie equipped to do as fine work as the big shops that have SIOO,OOO to $500,000 invested in equipment, and who charge accordingly, but that The Democrat is just, as well equipped for handling fine work as the Republican and does just as good work right along is readily proven. We pay our printer S2O per week, the highest wages by several dollars per week"ever paid a printer by any shop in Rensselaer; we pay it, too, because we think he is worth it. We have never found it necessary in our newspaper experience of nearly twenty-five years to disparage the ability of our competitors’ printers or the equipment of its shop in order to secure work, and we can’t complain but what we have always had our share of job printting, too. In fact right now we are rushed with work which has come to us entirely unsolicited. We have never used any underhand methods in bidding on work nor asked that any special favors be granted us or that a prospective customer do a dishonorable act to give us the job. The manner of letting this contract: Quoting bids, acting on “inside information,” and the manner of conducting the “systematic investigation,” was not slich as would be conducive to emulation by a student body of strong, virile typical young Americans such as the Rensselaer high school students are. As the teacher is, so will be the pupil. Else why the teacher? It is to be trusted the students will not be inoculated wtih the germs of such mean, little, insidious, despicable, petit larceny business methods in after life as were used in the letting of this contract on the eve of their graduation. The Republican admitted Wednesday night that it had reduced its original bid. The veriest tyro fa business will be forced to agree with us that curious, for want of a l>etter word, methods prevailed in the letting of this contract.