The Emporia news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1859-1881, 1872-12-13

hat the State work was miserably
executed; that much of it was done
put of the State. We believe the
editors and publishers were alone
for the change. The
people voted for the amendment to
the constitution because the editors
and printers were supposed to
know what was best in the matter.
Now the people are surprised to
see some of those same editors ad-
vocating a return 10 the old system.
We are utterly opposed to q re-
turn to the contract plan. We be-
lieve the present one il the best for
the State. All who know anything
about printing remember how ter
ribly the public work was botched
under the contract plan. 1t was sell
dom, indeed, that a job was done in
a manner fit TO be seen. The con-
tracts were frequently let to persons
who knew little or nothing about
printing-who were only anxious
to get the work through and draw
the pay. 1t was generally taken at
such rates that frequently parties
would not even take time to read
and correct the ordinary typograph-
icsl errors. The bills for the mem
bers of the legislature were seldom
correct, thus rendering them use
less. 1t was not uncommon to lind
twenty errors in page of an ordi-
nary sized pamphlet, while the pa
per used was of so poor and film
sy a charact er that business man
would not have common hand bills
printed upon it. The work was
taken at prices below those that the
contractors had to pay for type-set-
ting alone. The only way the con-
tractor could make up his deficien-
cies was in stealing paper. Every
sheet of paper used was counted as
eight sheets. This is specimen of
the stealings, evasions of law and
dishonesty generally that then ex-
listed. ItwouId be so again. Print
ers who are "out of Sorts" who
want a job, and have not the oapac-
ity and energy to conduct papers
themselves, will bid on the State
work, and those charged with the
duty of letting the work cannot
guard against bungling incompe-
tency-
Under the present plan the work
is done well and promptly. We
are really proud of the manner in
which our State printing in done.
We arc not afraid to compare il
with that OF any other State in the
Union.
It is argued that the printing costs
too much. The figures, we believe,
will show that it does not cost more
in proportion to the amount of work
done, nor more per capita than I'M
der the contract plan. We venture
the assertion that a comparison of
the appropriations for printing eight
and ten years ago with those of the
past two or three years will estab-
lish the above fact. If the printing
costs too much the legislature, we
apprehend, is more to blame than
the State Printer or the system I'M
der which the work is done. There
is no doubt but that thousands of
dollars worth of printing is order
ed every winter, that is q useless
expenditure of money. The Print
err is not to blame for this.
We had the honor of being a
member of the legislature when the
new system was put in operation.
and was q member of the commit
tee which drew the bill and fixed
the prices of the different classes OF
work, and the quality of paper oh
which each was to be done.
If printers and editors.will take
the trouble to examine these prices
they will see that they are no more
than they charge their patrons for
similar work. These prices might
be amended, especially in the mat
ter of paper, as it is somewhat
cheaper now than when the bill
was drawn. The law may need over
hauling in many respects. This can
be done without attempting to
"wipe ont the State Printer" or the
system under which the work is
done. Competent committees have
Investigated the printing every win
ter, VIC believe. and everything has
been found right. 1t is the amount
of work ordered by the legislature
that makes the large appropriations
for public printing.
Now, a word as to the Printer.
Several papers are making war upon
Mr.. Prouty. We did not vote for
him two years ago, and have no in
terest whatever in his reelection.
But we must say that we believe he
performs his duties with the ut
most honesty and fidelity to the
public. Several daily papers have
"leveled their guns" at the Com
monwealth because it is the estate
paper" The patronage it gets from
the State is q verv small item, not
amounting to a thousand dollars a
year. The State publications made
in it cost the State blu: little more
than the mere cost of type-setting.
They are of such a nature that they
would necessarily have to be pub
lished in q paper printed at the cap
ital, and we do not see why they
might not as well be published in
the Commonwealth as any other
paper. We presume the success
of the Daily Commonwealth and
the high rank it has taken for ability,
have something to do with the de-
nunciations it receives at the hands
of some OF the papers. We have
more cause to complain, perhaps,
than any paper in the State, because
when we were publishing a daily it
with us more seriously
than all the other pspersin the State,
but such motives are only selfish,
aud We are willing to do Justice to
so good q paper as the Common
wealth, and to wish it still greater
success and we will say, from what
we know at present, that we should
be entirely satisfied with Prouty's
He has done his work