The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1851-02-15

Congress, and Afterwards adopted a diffsrsn
system Of letting It. by receiving sealed psopo
GALS from all the world, and the contractor find
the job less profitable than the previous one, i
that reason why he shou d be relieved 6urei
not.
But what do you propose shall be the douceu
given 10 the contractors BY this bill The an
swer must, in great measure, be merely con
jectural. My own opinion, founded upon tn
closest investigation have been able to give TN
subject, is, that the passage of the bill now o.
your table will enable the contractors to realfzs
net profit of at least $4,000, and perhaps !
may reach $4,000. The net profit on the Pa
tent Office report alone, under this bill which
you are asked to pass, will be $5S,949 AZ. The
actual cost to the contractor, including labor
and materials, is @32,760 AZ. Tho amount
which he will receive, dedncting the fifty pei
cent from the prices fixed by the joint resolu.
ton Of 1919, will be $Sl,7O9 81, giving him the
net profit before stated. fheis paid according
to contract prices, he will receive for the same
work $3S,242 02--his profit at the existing
contract prices being $5,48l 60
The House will perceive the effect Of chang
ing the compensation from the contract to the
prices of 1919 on this document The profits
are equally great in proportion for all such doc
uments, AS large editions have been ordered by
Congress- For example: the Presidents mes
sage and accompanying documents, where fifteen
thousand extra copies were ordered; the Cali
fornia message, &C.. and it is these large editions
which swell so much the printers account. 1t
is due to candor that | should say that when the
edition ia small, only embracing what is termed
the regular number, (about two Thousand five
hundred copies,) the compensation of the prin-
ter is not 40 great in proportion under the res
oution Of 1919 as for the long numbers. 1t is
the press-wOfk which runs up so enormously
the cost Of large edition. For example: two
thousand five hundred copies Of document
worth but $4,000, requires as much labor in
composition, proof-reading, &C., as ten thousand
copies, for which the printer would receive
$4,000; and the only additional expense in
CURED in finishing off the seven thousand five
hundred additional copies would be the paper,
presswork, and folding. But the question may
BIZ propounded, why the prices of 1919 for press
work are 80 unreasonable now? The inven-
tons for facilitating the press-work have been
most extraordinary since 1919, aud | am not
sure that the labor saving in that department of
the arts is not greater than in all others. A
steam engine will drive almost any number of
presses. In the Union office there are six presses
which require the services Of twenty-five boys
and four men-in all twenty six They will dse-
patch as much printing in the same time as sew
enty-eight presses and one hundred and fifty -six
men would have done in 1919. Now, sir, can
the prices Of that day be the proper basis of
compensation for the present printers to Con-
gresss If we were desirious of making a con-
tract for any purpose, would we have reference
to existing prices, or to those that ruled thirty
years ago! apprehend, sir, that the reason
why these Anticipated prices are pressed with 80
much pertinacity upon US is, that the printer ex-
poets to line his pockets with government gold,
upon the reasonable assumption that this House
is ignorant of the magnificent liberality it is to
bestow by passing the bill An insupernble OBJ
lection, then, Mr. Speaker, to this bill is that
Congress, in annuiling fair contract, adopts
tariff of charges entirely antiquated, inappropri-
ate to the time, and that it does not know
whether the douceur is one or one hundred
thousand dollars.
1t has been said that the census printing was
taken from the contractors, out of which they
expected to make up all losses. Now, sir, | re-
terate the assertion, that that printing could not
have been considered as belonging er obicio to
the public printer, and | will apply two tests
which will show that the present contractors
themselves could not have reasonably anticipa-
ted it. Suppose the printing had been let, a
class to each, to five contractors, as it might
well have happened. When the contract was
given to the lowest bidder, who would have
been entitled to the census printing as public
printer? The contractor of class No. would
have been as much entitled to it as No. 2, and
No. 3 would have had equal claims with either,
and 80 on. The proposals required separate
bids on each Of the five classes, and the lowest
bidder on each to be the contractor Of that
class. Now, with what reason could the pres
ent contractors anticipate, with so much conf
dence as greatly to reduce their bids, that they
would get all the contracts, and thereby become
&c o6icio the census printers! No human fore
sight could have anticipated the result of the
opening Of the various bids, (and be it re-
membered, there was n number Of bidders on
each cass0 unless they played with "stocked
cards" The sequel showed that such vis-
ionary and ap-hazard calculation, if indeed the
census print ng was ever thought Of by them
in framing the bids, was most readily frustrated
They did not get all the classes--one class was
assigned to John II. Towers, whs has promptly
and faithfully executed his contract. Is he not
the public printer as well rs these contractors!
And if the census printing belongs er oficio to
the public printer, is not Mr.. Towers as Justly
entitled to claim it as Mr.. Richie? What rule
VI JuSllCe latrHcSS WOulu give DIR. Nlcnfe
the census printing in preference to Towers 3
The latter has entered bond to execute all the
printing in the frs. class, and is entitled TO all
the privileges and immuniics of public printer.
The prntig Of the census blank, was done by the
public printer in lS40--then one printer did all
the work; but how did he get the job! Not
er oficio as public printer, but by clause in the
act of l839, which directed the Secretary Of State
to hare the printing erecuted by the public
printer. The other test which apply to this
case 10 annihiate the pretence which has been
set up, that Congress has violated the contract
on its part. and cannot, therefore, demand it's
performance by the contractors, is to refer the
House to the manner Of paying the census
printer in 1910. twas not paid for by the Of.
fcers OF the House; 1t wasnot charged to the
contingent fund of the House; the accounts
were not audited by either the Committees on
Printing or Accounts. On the contrary, sir,
the accounts were vouched, audited, and paid for
at the department. in the same manner as all
other department printing
II is, then, very apparent, Mr. Speaker, that