The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1859-12-30
S6,449.59 $6,5l4.64
6,449.59

Difference in favor of Mr.. Goodrich's bid, Sl5.O5
The investigation into tho character of
the bids rendered is confined to Messrs.
Goodrich, Foster & Moore, Newson, and
Johnson & Slocum, for the reason that no
other bids, accompanied by the requisite
statements, rendering the proper securities,
and showing the requisite facilities, ap-
preached near enough to the bid of Mr..
Goodrich to be brought into competition
with it, or to be discussed in connection
with it. 1t is proper to state that the
comparative statements above given, are
based upon the estimates made in the Audi
tors advertisement inviting proposals, up.
on which the bids were to be made, and the
awards to be granted and which, therefore,
it is believed, form the proper basis for
making up such comparative statements.
1t is further said in the majority report
that the contract entered into between Mr..
Goodrich and the state Auditor is invalid
because the act of August 10th, 1858, under
which the contract was made, allows the
printing incident to the present Legislature,
to be done by person not authorized by
itself, and (says the majority report,) 'to the
printers of the Senate and House necessari-
ly is confided important records, as engross-
ed bills, &C." This is not the case in the
present instance, as the bills of the Senate
are by rule printed after the second reading,
and before the bill comes up for examine
tion in the Committee of the Whole, and
with the journals and all other records,
should be printed from copies furnished by
the Clerk.
Section S, of Article II, of the Consti-
tuition, is referred to, "They 1.-THE Senate
and House, shall keep journals of their
proceedings and from time to time publish
the same.''
This, in the minds of the majority of the
committee, clearly recognizes the right of
the Senate to publish its own proceedings"
which is unquestionable, and" the MAORI
ty add, "to select its own officer for that
purpose" The fallacy of this conclusion,
however, is clearly apparent, when it is
remembered that under the contract system
the contractor for binding books, and print.
ing bills, is no more an officer of the Legis-
lature under the Constitution or under any
existing law, than the contractor who may
furnish fuel for the Senate Chamber.
In the States of Wisconsin, Ohio, Rhode
Island, North Carolina, Tennessee, Ken
lucky, Georgia, and Mississippi, and per-
haps in other States. public printing is done
by contract either express or implied, and
the contract in those States is for two
years. In Michigan the stationery, printing
and fuel for the Legislature and the State,
is let by contract for two years and in
Pennsylvania the printing contract runs for
three years and yet in all these States the
Legislatures are required to keep journals
of their proceedings, and from time to time
publish the same.
The minority of this committee would
further urge that even allowing for the sake
of the argument that the act of March 10,
1858, or the printing contract under it
were invalid, or that fraud or collision had
interviewed to vitiate either, land which the
minority have failed to discovery vet bv
reference to article 3 of the constitution, It
will be seen that the judicial, and not the
legislative power should declare them so to
be for any effective purpose whatever. The
legislature may repeal the act, but will it be
said that vested rights can be ignored or
the validity of contracts impaired by the
edict of the legislative power, without the
formality of law, and without any opportu.
nifty being given to the defendant to protect
whatever interests be may have involved
therein?
The minority of this committee would
further present that in awarding the public
printing to any other than the contractor no
specific rates Of compensation are established
except the ordinary published rates, or un-
less the Senate may fall back upon the bid
on file in the Office of the Auditor, which