The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1858-09-23

Difference In favor Of Mr. 0ooirisb. bid .,., Gao u
IN accordance with the provisions Of the
law, issued proposals for executing the
State printing. binding and advertising, for
two years, and therein specified the kind
character, and quantity, to he done, M near ~
] could estimate the same. ind stated that
bids may bc made for either or all Of the
several items numbered" M required to do
by law.
Twelve proposals. were received In oil,
and IN soon M my other duties would permit,
opened the bids and awarded the contract.
Out Of this number, there were but two
persons who bid for the whole work TO be
done viz, T.. \. GooDRIoH and JAMES
Nuts. Tho bid Of Mr.. GoopRIcu was
much the lowest The other ten bids were
for portions Of the work only. OF these
ten, live bid higher than Mr.. GooDRicn, with
but slight difference on one or two items.
On the binding, there were but four bidders,
and on this, Mr.. G0oDRIGu bid much lower on
the whole than any ono else, and according
10 the estimate Of the work TO be done, M
published In the proposals. was required
TO make, the binding amounts 10 over one
third Of the whoie work.
Mr.. u. WINS also the lowest bidder Tor the
printing and TRANSMITTING into foreign Ian.
guages, there being but one other bidder.
After ascertniDing the above facts, the
question came up under the law, whether
the bids should be awarded 10 the lowest
bidder on each separate item, az numbered
In the published proposal, or whether Il
should BIZ awarded TO the lowest bidder for
the whole work.
On this point the law il as follows: And
at the expiration Of the time limited In said
notice for receiving such proposals., the
Auditor shall open the same. and award the
said contract or contracts 10 the lowest
and best bidder or bidders, for the WHOLE or
any portion Of said printing, binding or nd.
yertising for Said term OF two years specified
In said public notice"
The great mass Of The bidding was vari.
Gus ard quite irregular on digeren, items OF
the same character Of printing nome items
Of the nmc bid, and Of the same character
Of work, being bid very low, while others
were bid very high, Ny conclusion was,
upon this state Of facts, that the persons
who bid 10 low on some items, calculated 10
make up the loss by bidding high on Others.
10 IA 10 make the average Of their bids on
the whole work, at least up TO living rates
and II awarded the items on which they
made their lowest bid, that they couli not
perform the work, and In The end the
State would be the l0ser, Notwithstanding
the guarantee Of boDdsmeB for the execu.
ton Of the contract. For IN such cases the
State has almost universally 10 sue the
guarant0rs, and seldom II ever succeeds 10
collecting anything. 10 the meantime, "
printing would not be done, and the into
ess u the people would suffer until another
contract, at ordinary rates, would have 20
be made with some one else. In every case,
where persons had bid very low for some
items, they invariably bid corrspoDdingly
high % Others, thus proving my deductions
10 be correct.
therefore came TO the conclusion that
Mr.. GOODRICH. being the lowest bidder for
the binding and printing and trsnslstiog into
foreign languages, and for the advertising
ADD Publishing u the laws. &c, and be be
Ing the lowest bidder for the phole rork,
and having shown most ample facilities for
ia execution, believe l did my duty In
exercising the discretion given me by the
laS, by awarding the contract to.him for the
whois puk. WV. r. DusBAK,