PUBLIC WORKTh« action of out worthy school board ehowa that body to be composed of level headed, conservative, conscientious, practical business men, always awake and . watchful to the requirements of the schools, and the interest of the tax payers, whose money they are entrusted with.A number of times have the present officials since being in office, shown con* siderable dexterity in financial manipulation, with a considerable saving to the treasniy, but no case shows out so plainly as the present one, where the letting of the contract for the new school house was at issne.Something like a week ago the bid were opened, and if the officials had chose, they could have awarded the contract then and there, and saved themselves a little inconvenience and time, but there being a wide diversity in the _ propositions, and a perceptible uncertainty in some of the bids, it was thought it raifcht be a good piece of business tact and official'diplomacy to lay tha matter on the table and give contractors an opportunity to study, reconsider, revise, etc., and the result is the building will oe elected at a saving of severalthousand dollars than would have been had they acted on first impulses, and a number of important changes made, that will be of decided benefit to the structure and to our citizens.It might be well for our worthy coun-cilma^ic body, and other local public servants to emulate these actions, and had thfe same principals been followed in the recent sewer contract, it might have been possible to liave aaved a considerable sum of our borough money, as only one,firm was allowed to mako a price on 'tbii work, as was explained in a lucent editorial,in the Independent, and in such *a case, it is no more than reasonable to . presume that that firm or individual will get out of a piece of work, all they or he can. That’s natural. lint it’s not economic, it’s not business to award a contract in that way In fact it shows very, very poor financeering, or that ' theieis a “graft’' some where for some person or persons' It has been asserted in the face of our editotial that the contract in question was or is only a continuation of last year’s contract. If that bo so, why was it thought necessary to call a meeting to reuse the ordinance regulating that particular point, and why was a change made m the contract price?If council had made a contract covering the sewering of the entire town, at one stipulated price, all the steps refer ted to would have been wholly unnecessary. And, had they thrown the matter wide open, as the school board did, the saving could, it ia safe to say, have been written in three if not four figures. We know, of course, that one of our councilmen gaid to a reporter “We get fat Oil such stuff as that,’' and that the “reporter” asserted “an editorial when so 'long-drawn-out,5 loses its power,”But, that does not detract from the facts in the case, and as oar assertions or statements have never been contradicted, we must have been pretty nearly correct, and it ts hoped our people will not be imposed upon hereafter by a continuation of the unpopular railroading system, into which our esteemed public servants seem to be drifting.i| 5»|*0^O+O^O-pO+C^0+0*fr0*h04^O+O*HH*C^O4K+O+0*K^O+O+O-J-0'jHV-fr0*froq-0*P0+0*f*0*S*O+lt;*|*0*H?*l*0d*6*f'lt;-|-0+0*p0^Mf0*frO+0d*O+O*l*0+0*i'O. n C4*0+0-p0|*0^*0*|*0*b0»l*0*l*04«3+0+0*i*0*|*0+0^0*k0«fr04*0+0‘3*0+0*!-04*6^0+04*0+04