The republic., 1852-01-13

for il at half the sum that Mr.. RivEs is paid
for IL; aud, If the contract system is to be per
sisted in on his advice, Congress should begin
by advertising for the lowest bidder for the DE
bates. With some So 900 Of work at fair
prices. Mr.. RwEs no doubt can afford to bid
lower for some other portions of the public
printing than printers who are not sustained by
any such fair-price job.
II appears, then. that Congress does not give
the reporting and printing of lis o,rn proceed
iiigs To the lowest bdder--nor does il SO give
the publication Of its ia,os. Perhaps no better
illustration could be given Of the injustice done
10 the Washington printers by the contract
system, than is 10 be found in the fact we are
about to mention. For several years the an
nusl 10000 copies Of the pamphlet edition OF
the laws were set up al auction IN Washington
To the lowest bidder. They were bid for ne
cessarily at price Just sufficient to pay for the
printing and binding on the cheapest scale,
AT such price Of course the printer merely
paid his hands and paper-maker, without any
pecuniary profit 1t was suggested at length,
in the Senate, that this edition, So let out To
the lowest bidder, was very shabbly printed.
and that there was landsomer edition which
might be contracted for, published at Boston.
and the Secretary of State was ordered 10 con
tract for the Boston edition. 1t was shown to
the Secretary, by sufficient certificates, what
would be fair prices for the execution of this
work, and he contracted at those prices with
Messrs. LITTLE 4 BRowN, of Boston, for
the ten thousand copies for $780, price
which enables them TO furnish handsome pam
phlet, atno more than Ia reasonable profit. Hence
springs the remarkable fact that the Govern
ment of the United States 60 from the seat OF
Government some fire hundred miles to get
their la,Ds printed IN panphlet-not because as
fine printing cannot be executed in Washington
as in Boston, but because the Boston publisher
has the privilege Of contracting on the fair
price and fair-work system, while the Wash
ington printer is compelled to compete on the
lowest bidder system.
We know not that we could more strikingly
illustrate the injustice that is done to the Ex-
ecutive Departments, in the presentation OF
their documents to the public, than is manifested
by the fact that Congress ,riH neither print its
debates nor its latcs on the lorcst bidder systens
but executes this branch of the public work, to
the amount of 100000 annually, on the sys-
tenn of good work and fair prices. Now, we
submit that there should be some uniformity
and consistency in the system. Boston should
not be more favorably treated than Washing
ton. Mr.. RIvEs should not be permitted to
report and print at his own prices, and the "rest
of mankind held up to the lowest-bldder sys-
tenn. This would please Mr. RIvEs exactly,
and enable him to monopolize the public print
ing at the present day, as he monopozed it in
the old JACKSON and VAN buren, times; but
we see no good reason why Mr.. RvEs should
be so sgnally favored by this special and ex
ceptional Legislation.
We apprehend that Mr.. SMITH must have
lost sight of these facts when he spoke so con-
fdently of the lowest bidder system as sue
cessful policy. The only part of the Congress
slonal printing that is executed neatly and
promptly-to wit, the publication Of the Debates
and of the La,cs-is done by a system different
from that which Mr.. SMITH is disposed to COM
mend We hope, at all events, that the sys-
TEN will be made uniform, and that Mr.. SMITH
will not sustain the exceptional cases for the
benefit of Mr.. RvEs and Messrs. LITTLE s
BRowS, while he would apply ruinous sys-
TEN to all other publishers.