Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1872-11-22
The State Printing Again.

I
questioned the propriety of their course
They simply looked out for their own in
terests; and if they have had privileges il
the matter of the printing to which TIL
other printers in the State did not conside
themselves entitled, the Court has in effee
decided that it is all right.
The Freeman's reply is courteous in tone
1t saws we omitted one or two facts i'm
portant to q full understanding of the case
Ofthese facts the chief is that the bids fol
the State printing which were offered by thu
Free Press Association "were not 50 ad
vantageous to the State by from $4,000 Il
S.. 900 as the proposals of the Montpe
lier printers" To this we have to say
first. we cannot see that this . fact, if i
be one. affects the legal point at issue
and second. that we do not understand
it to BE- a fact. As we have figured 1t
the difference between our bids and
those Of the Montpelier printers amounts tC
much less than the sum named by the
Fireman. and at any rate if the bids of the
Montpelier printers were lower than ours
thi, year. ours were still lolrer than The PR
ces aficlich thcMontpaier printers obtained The
printing. 5etore-a fact which shows very
clearly that there was no intention to gouge
the State. ON the part of the Free Press As
-ociation
The Fireman also alludes to the delay in
the completion of the printing, which how
ever l. nothing new this year. This, it init
mate, j. due in part to the application for a
mqndanHN.
We do not see how that can be allowed
a- an excuse. The Montpelier printers pro-
fe--ed from the first to have no doubt that
they should secure the printing, and of
course they were not justified in emitting
any preparation for il. Moreover the deci-
sion of the court was rendered, and the
award to them confirmed, jcfore the day on
vljci The State q6iovs are required 70 hare
thar reports ready .forP riating-which is the
earliest day at which the printers can ever
expect to commence the work.
Wemay add that we should feel no COM
FUNCTIONS if the printing had been delayed
bv our application to the court. We were
perfectly justified imam effort to secure our
legal rights under law-which if its words
have any meaning, entitled the Free Press
Association to the contract for the State
printing-and to secure for the crafta deter
,nination of the fact whether or no there Is
any law on the subject of the State printing,
even though the effort haddelayed the prin-
ting for six months
The Journals reply i, we are sorry to
SAY, an iil-tempered one, and We give it the
less attention on that account Why it
should be 50, We do not know for, as We
have said, we have not in any way attacked
the Montpelier printers. Possibly there Is
something in the suggestion which has been
made TO us, that the Journal Is put out, be
cause the Free Pres, Association had the
audacity TO bid for the printing at all, and
thus to prevent the Montpelier Offices from
again getting ;he contracts at prices a third
higher than they have now them taken at.
The Jouraal says we could not have done
the printing, if we had secured the con-
contracts How the Journal came to know
50 mach more about orr facilities and re-
sources. than We do ourselves. We do not in
quire " know, however, that We did not
bid for anything we could not accomplish,
and if we had secured the contracts we
should have shown that it Is possible to get
out the reports, in good shape, at the open
ing of the session-saying only such delay As
might be occa,ioned by the fault Of officers
in not promptly furnishing the '' copy " for
their reports. for which. of course. no prin-
ter can be held responsible The Journal
talk. a, if the FREE Pass office had never
done any State Printing. But in former
years, and when our facilities were not !
nearly as complete as now, We often printed /
the largest r,port-that Of the Board Of
Education, besides Others; niwhat is more, |
they used to be out at the time agreed on. |
The Journal says we meanly aspersed - I
the State officials. Not at all. We men |
toned the fact that the court had sustained /
the officials. and it Is all they need for
their justification. They disregarded the
law. but the court. which is, or ought to
be, the especial guardian Of the laws, says
they had right to disregard it. We can
inform the journal that one at least Of the
State officials concerned, does not feel 80 as
oersed.' On the contrary. he has taken
1ains to assure Us that he sees now, a he
mad not done before, that Observance of
he provisions Of the law Is essential to fair
competition among the printers, and that in
us opinion it was mistake that the law
7as not strictly observed from the first.
The Journal expresses surprise at the de-
usion Of the FREE Pass people in suppos-
NJ that the proposals for the printing must
re sent in by the 10th Of July. In repub-
shing the law We explained sufficiently how
bat delusion came about. The law says in
erms which could not possibly be more pos
i've, d" said sealed proposals MUST be de-
osited in the Secretary of States Office on
r 5cforc the tenth dag Of July." l
But. says the Journal, and now we come !
, the nub of the whole matter-the law :
as mot imperative, - and the court has 50 f
scided The Journal Is better situated than q
e are to obtain a knowledge of the grounds :
] which the decision of the court rested, /
ID we accept its statement. Here, then,
a law on the statute book, whose object il
Jyious. and whose terms are ''must" and
shall" But its object is defeated, and we
e told that it Is all right, because the Su- a
-eme Court has decided the law to be mot
operative The public have now, if not Il
fore, distinct interest in the case, and in :
cir behalf we ask. hoIC many more lars d
re lre on the statute book ir.ich. perenlp- d
~ IN form, die merely discretionary IN fact? Il
nd how are plain people, who are expected OF
govern themselves by the law, TO know 1
lich are commands and which not? Who N
Il go through the statute book for US, and I
l Us when must" and SHALL mean al
lst and shall; and when, as in the law re- al
ling TO the State printing, they mean may, W
the parties choose? y
That the public already takes an interest I'll
the subject, As well the way in which the Sc
&C strikes unprejudiced people, may be 10
n from the communication, from an inAu- -
tial source, which We print in another ID
umn. For our part, we see no need of u
aiming laws which are simply advisory, Id
whose advice the parties most concerned ~
: under no obligations to follow. We .
ink, and We believe the craft in the State &c
nerally will agree with US, that no statute
all would be better that this Even if 6,
2 Secretary Of State should announce an D,
Ter year that he now intends to follow the !,