A Territorial Feud Over Public Printing
A scathing editorial from The Standard details a dispute between the newspaper and a Federal official over control of territorial printing contracts.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
Before the Legislature convened, the Secretary informed us that he had the disposal of the Legislative printing, whereupon we strove to induce him to make a contract with us for the work. The Secretary, however, refused to give us a definite answer. Enough has since transpired to satisfy us that he did not intend to confer any pecuniary benefit upon us, believing that the Legislature would elect a Printer almost as their first act. Secretary Turney expressed great satisfaction in having it in his power to aid us in establishing the Standard, and assured us that we could have our pay for the printing as fast as the work was done. We felt grateful, and in the overflow of our gratitude, we indited an editorial complimenting his Message. Finding that we had taken no further notice of his message in general terms, he urged us to back up his suggestions on the subject of the University, offering us great inducements to defend his specific recommendations. Very much to our surprise, we found that he had pronounced the course of the University Commissioners a gross fraud upon the people. While we could not conscientiously defend that fraud, we declined to say anything against it, being at the time in receipt of funds from the Republican friends. The new Printer was at last elected; but before we were relieved from the labor and expense of doing the work, the Secretary advised us to sell out to Mr. Poe. It is now evident he hoped to lay us under personal obligation by a display of generosity and thus secure our influence. To the close of the Legislature, we had not received a dollar for the services rendered. We have, therefore, no alternative left us but to send our bill to Washington for payment. We hope a rebuke will be administered to the Secretary that will prevent his again using his official position and the money of the Government to suborn and degrade an independent Republican journal.
“We will not, however, consent to dictate to him, but defer to his judgment, and comply with his modest request that we avoid, in our opinion, any mention of the 'matter'—that we shall hear no more from them for a time.”
This 1862 dispute over political patronage and government printing contracts highlights the blurred lines between journalism, political loyalty, and public funding. Even today, the tension between independent media and the powers that control government advertising or public contracts remains a critical issue in civic accountability.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.