The daily union., 1852-09-08

mind. the result is inevitable II you go under the
contract you must lose great deal OF money, and
propose 10 ou now before Congress adlourns, that you
come forward and surrender your contract, and let a
aew arrangement be made, because the committee
nave determined, if the contract is maintained. they
VIII see that II Is faithfully executed IN every parnc-
ular, and Will let no personal considerations induce
Them 10 receive work below the contract; and unless
you do inferior work and furnish inferior paper you
must sustain runous loss" After some consultation
they agreed with that such was the fact and they
would be compelled TO lose money II they went on with
ihe contract No alteration, however, was made
do not state this Tor any other purpose than 10 show
the foundation upon which base the opinion have
ressed, that they have lost money They went through
With the conraet is not necessary for me TO cay how
That would involve great deal of statement and discus
SION, which not disposed TO go into; but state il
the basis OF my opinion that they have lost money My
estimate is that they lost from $4,000 to $4,000 mot
Lees Than $4,000, and do not believe than $50 900
think II y tar basis upon which TO make The estimate
Then, as stated when up before, do not think these
contractors, any contractors who have made bad bar
gain, with their eyes open, in the face OF competition
have right TO CLAIM any extraordinary beality on the
nan OF The government to release them from their oblga
ion. and pay them profit upon what would otherwise
he loss; but, the other hand, very far from be-
ing willing, either as an individual as member OF the
Senate 10 receive work the hands OF any man and re-
fuse him fair and living profit on it, For that reason
fixed upon the OF $50 900. allowing $50 900
the maximum of the loss which think Mr. Richie may
nave sustained That will allow him profit for four
years labor OF $40 900.
Mr.. BRODHEAD | desire to ask the senator. as he
was chairman OF The committee. whether Mr. Richie
was not paid all that his contract called for and whether
Wendell & Van Ben,huysen were not paid all that they
could claim under the contract Ii and ii one sus
taned loss OF $l7 900 and the other loss OF $4,000
Van Ben,hnysen in the provso, fbe senator as erls
that they incurred loss OF $4,000. we are going to
pay all these losses, know very well my friend from
Delaware Mr. BAYARD never agrees to pay upon con,
tract where the has not been in error and
where he contractor ncurs loss through hls own fault
Mr., BORLAND. My friend inquiries if Wendell y
VI. A. D.t,. - ku. hnnn
The full amount which their contracts would give them
OF Wendell Van Benthuysen, know very little as TO
what was paid them. The last OF their accounts was
settled about the commencement OF my service on the
committee, they the printers before came here
With regard to Mr., Richie have certain knowledge
though there can be no question, as the accounts Will
state this: During the time that was chairman OF the
committee never bad brought to to be audited a
single one OF Mr. Ritchie's accounts None were pre-
sened while was presentln The committee In my ab
snce, during the OF Congress- many OF them were
audited by the board consisting Of the Secretary OF the
Senale, The Clerk OF the House, and the Clerk OF the
Mr HAMLIN stated when this debate commenced
what the sum which would be paid TO Mr. Richie
upon half the prices OF 1871 stated that it would be
over 100000. thought then that the detailed state
men prepared by the clerk of the Printing Committee was
in my desk here but it not went to the Printing
Committee room. The clerk had furnished to one OF the
therefore not able to furnish the details but will fur
nsh figures, with which trust my friend from Alabama
Ma CLEMENsl will be satisfied
The whole amount received by Mr. Richie for printing
un2er his contract was Sl45000. This sum, II will be
observed, was received under his contract Now, take
the documents upon which these sums were paid, and
estimate them document by document, uron the prices of
1919, and then take half OF that amount and il will
leave the sum Of $34S,0o0.
Mr. CLEMENS ~ "a Sin his seaD Oh. no.
MIR. HAMLlN. The senator from Alabama seems TO
be not quite satisfied with the correctness OF my state
ment Perhaps other senators may be- will state the
manner Of estimating it ho!l in my hand a detailed
sfIunaf apfo fpur fha
OF showing specifically just how this sum is arrived at
Mr. CLEMENS. The point is not arrived at at all
received $4,000 Was that the value Of the printing
or did he do that printing al loss
Mr.. HAMLlN. ! raised no sach question. stated
to the Senate what now stand here prepared to prove
This statement made out by the clerk Of the Com
ml,ee on Printing and not by myself, although il was
examined BY me stated that one half Of the prices OF
1919 would add 10 the price Of Mr. Rl,cbies contract
more than 5000 600, and now proceeding to prove
it He has been paid Sl45 900 already under his
tract on these same documents he would have received
at the rate OF one half the prices Of 1919, the sum of
900 That makes difference oil 100000. There
Espys repsr and some other minor matters, which,
when paid for under the contract and these scaled by the
can be calculated. S2l4o0o That is the difference be-
half the prices Of 1919 and the contract How do
derive il hold in my hand detailed statement Of
one of the documents in four paris-he Patent Office
repon-and find that under the contract for that
port he did receive S631S2 So One half OF the aes OF
1919 would have amounted 10 Sl5s 939 49, showing that
ne would nave received 1or pruning tnat single docu-
men under the prices OF the resolution OF 1919, ss3,
757 80 than he entitled TO under the contract
The details OF that document as follows:
First session Thiry-6rst CougresUnder the prices OF
Isl9 fifty per of, Patent Office report, 100 900
copies would amount S547sS "a
Second part of same, 5000 copies 30,I04 81
Mecha meal part Of the Patent Office report, I'd
session Thirty Congress- as 900 copies IS sos 25
Agricultural part for I'd session. 1876 900 copies bS27l 90
l5S,g39 SO
For same work under contract price, Patent
Office report 900 copies, would amount
Second part of same, IS, 900 copies 70 'ss5 90
Mechanical part Of Patent Off.e
report, h session Thirty.frst
Ejngres,, 5000 copies 6,5tS Is
Agricultural part for I'd session,
l3j 900 copies IL, 405 80
- $3.50 20
90 757 80
What is his actual osss answer, we cannot tell but
s one OF the easiest things TO tell what the of
hs work-whai the paper cost, what the composition
cost, what the ink and what the rents An
be stated of the cost of every item
that has been done bat the committee have never
seen any such consequently left to form
the best estimate we to what the cost In
my judgment prudent, careful printer would have
ecued the work, IN the manner in which IL done,
without the loss of a single dollar. | have no doubt Of
IT. That IT was executed, do not believe; but that
there was loss itand that loss varies where
from $4,000 to S30000-I have very little doubt /
think The senator iron Arkansas is probably nearly right
in his estimate II settle this matter upon equ
table terms, II would reasonable that should be
presented with an account, to enable us to determine
properly what we should give. have been to the com
mltee room since this discussion commenced but had
supposed that II would have taken place. ] would have