The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1866-01-03
The Public Printing.


The re assembling of the Legislature to-day
furnishes us with an occasion for saying
word in regard TO one of the questions which
will very soon come up in that body for dis
cussion and decision.
Whilst we, at any time, advance with diib-
dence our own opinions upon questions pend
ing before the Legislature, and wish TO do so
in this instance, We, in regard to subject with
which we, as practical printers, are so well
acquainted, and the supposed mysteries - Of
which we can "unloose familiar as our gar
ter" we think our experience may be worth
something.
Governor PEIRroIST, in his annual message,
recommended the contract system. This Is
opposed by some of the members, and not
without reason, on the ground that that sys-
TEN has seldom, if ever been successful in Sc
curing both good and cheap printing. But
how do its opponents propose TO remedy this
evil? DO they propose to give some one carte
blanche 10 execute the public printing AMI
charge what ne will? BY no means. They
propose TO elect public printer. What then?
The public printer will do the work and will
be paid for his services, not just such n sum
or sums as he may in his wisdom or folly
choose 10 demand, but prices which some pro.
perly authorized Official of the State shall adj
Judge 10 be fair and rernunerative. Is not this
true statement of the case? We think 1t is;
for we are confder that no member OF either
body would declare .aat he favored the cleo
ton Of 4 public printer with the understand
ing that said printer was TO be paid, If he
demanded, two dollars per thousand ems for
composition, or two dollars per token for press
work What follows? Why, that even after
the election of public printer there is quasi
contract system enforced by the State officials.
And this being so, the public naturally ask,
why not have the same kind of contract with
out electng public printer? Why reduce the
number of contracIors-quasi contractors, if
YOU prefer that kind-to one? Why not allow
free competition Why have "usury law
which prescribes one per cent, or one In q
dozen, as the only legal number Of printers
with whom contract shall be made?
But it is said that the contract system has
not hitherto worked well. And why ho''
Simply because the same mistake when Is part
and parcel of the election OF puplic plli'"i
has ALWAYS been made part ana parcei oi tie
contract system. In the one case the Leeisii-
ture confines the printing to one man oy nam
ing him. In the other, 1T limits the CONTRACT W
one man by specifying the lowest olooeF )
and as the lowest bidder may possibly Dc Il
very low fellow, by no means d circuit 10 LIS
80. no has no conscientious scruples TO pre-
vent him from making numerous olahR pages
ar using Indifferent paper or bad INK, or EN-
n,oyinp incompetent workmen, and thus
bringing the contract system into contempt
Inevitably, then, we are by this train of rea-
soning brought back TO the same conclusion
at which we arrived in the argument against
the election of q public printer. There must
be a contract; but the State official must have
some discretion allowed him. He must not be
compelled TO contract with a man named by
the Legislature, nor with one designated as
1.-THE lowest bidder" He must do as he
would were the printing TO be done for him
self-exercise his judgment in employing his
agent, and contract with some man who will
do the WORK both well and cheaply.
Is it said that the official may have favo-
rite printeri So he may have; but the pre-
sumption Is that he will get the work done
better than it is done under the contract sys-
tenn, and more cheaply than it is done by an
elected public printer. But the Legislature
need not allow this objection TO continue TO
exist. Their printing committees, as already
organized, are competent to enter into the very
kind Of contract needed, and TO insure justice
to the State and 10 the printer, being free 10
act according TO their judgment, not having
been bound up either by legislative nomina-
tion, or by legislative restriction to the :" low
est bider"
Has anybody claim upon the Legislature
In this matteri No one that we have heard
named. Messrs. ALLEGRE & GooDE and GLEN
NIT & GARY are, we understand, at present
doing the public printing. Mr. ALLEaRE was
for many years in the Enquirer office while the
proprietor Of that paper was the public prin.
ter, and is. therefore, as much entitled 10 be
MI RITcHIE's successor as any other man can
possibly be- But we regard all pretensions of
this sort as simply ridiculous. II, as the vir-
ginia Bill Of Rights declares, public Offices
ought not TO be Unbeatable or descendible-
that Ii. bona Gds offices--with how much more
reason may II be declared that the recipients OF
pecuniary benefits can transmit no claims upon
the public treasury either TO their children
or their successors In business3 We will not
waste words upon this point We will merely
add, in justice 70 ourselves and an evidence that
we are NOT bidders for "a job" that, SO far
are we from being opposed TO the employment
Of the gentlemen whom we have named that
We should be pleased TO learn that they are to
continue 70 execute the public printing And
wshavs no fears that, II they should prove 70