The Weekly Kansas chief. [volume] (Troy, Kan.) 1872-1918, 1878-01-31
something to "Beo'' at.

ury, and the people Of the Conn.y were not tax
cd to pay it. We showed that The law provided
the fees the printer should receive for this work,
which were collected from The delinquent lands;
and that the fees provided were always col
lected even if the printer got only one-fourth
of the lawful smonnt. The cost TO the owner
of the delinquent land was the same, and the
County was specializing on the labor Of the
printer. No, that is not a correct exprcssion-it
was not the County, but the County Treasurers,
that speculated. There is not a line of law for
making any disposition of the fees collected,
or requiring the Treasurer to turn the excess in
to the Treasury. The law specifically fixed the
printers fees, and then stopped, supposing, of
course, that the printer would get those fees.
But whey the printer was beaten down one-half
one-fourth on his fees, the Treasurer cooly
pocketed the other one-half three -fourths.
Some County Treasurers in this State, in past
years. pocketed thousands of dollars in this way.
We have also given instances in which printers
have brought suit and recovered their full
amount of fees, notwithstanding cut-throat bids
to the contrary. To all these facts, and to the
letter of the law the subject, that able paper,
the Troy Bulletin, replied, boo, you old fool!"
Now, here comes to hand something exactly
to the point, in the shape of judicial decision,
by Of the ablest District Judges in the State.
This case occurred in Crawford County, aud the
following article. from the Girard Press, states
it in full The BalIefiH is requested to copy, aud
then 'boo" that District Judge for an old fool:-
IMPORTANT DECISION FOR PUBLIsHERs-In Novem-
Der, 1876, the County Commissioners of this County
advertised for sealed proposals to do the County
printing for 1877, saying. among other things, that
\, iIs shanII he furs lyerfl land
each description, also town lots, each description.
The publishers of the Press did not believe the Com
missoners had right to compel them to bid for the
delinquent tax list, the law distinctly provided
the that should be paid for that kind of work
On the 3d of January 1871, We presented bid which
after stating the prices at which legal blanks would
be printed-recited that ll the legal advertising for
the County would be done free of charge" Our bid
accepted by the County Board, and when the
bill for publishing the delinquent tax list was pre-
sented at the rates which the law provides shall be
paid for its publication, the Commissioners refused
TO pay the same ON the ground that We had contract
ed TO do the work free of charge, whereup0n
agreed statement of facts was presented to Hon. Is.
W. Perkins, Judge of the Eleventh Judicial District,
and the up for hearing at the late term of
Court. In the agreed statement submitted were the
advertisement of the Commissioners and the bids of
Upton & Damoreaux, of the Ners, and Wasser q
Riddle of the Press. The Commissioners admitted
that the County had collected twenty-five cents for
each tract of land and ten cents for each lot adver
tised but claiming that the bid included the taxst,
while claimed it did not The Court decided that
the bid did not include the tax-st, it not le
gal advertising for the County; that the law proyid
ed just what should he paid the printer, and did not
allow the County to speculate the cost of such adj
vertising; that the County had right to a cent of
the money thus collected. and there provis-
ion which entitled it to use the amount paid to the
Treasurer in of that paid to the printer, and
that the Commissioners had no control over the tax
list except that the bills presented were
rect and if correct to pay the same Judgment, was,
therefore, awarded for the amount of our bill,
S2l6.I5.
Now, if you have had a right good "bOO" over
the foregoing, swell yourself up for a still big
ger "boo," for here comes something still closer
to the point, and from a higher authority. 1t is
nothing less than official decision by the law
officer of the State, the Attorney General in re-
ply to the applications of number of County
Attorneys, for an official decision upon the sub
ject. His decision settles it more thoroughly than
the most sanguine have ever claimed. He says
that where compensation of the printer for any
kind of legal work is specified in the law, the
County Board has no authority to let it to bids
at lower rate. That money is guaranteed to
the printer by law, and there is authority
given in the law for any set of men to deprive
him of any portion Of it. The law of 1872 gives
the County Board control Of the printing, by en-
powering them to designate the paper in which
the printing shall be done; but it does not au-
thorize them to let it to bids, to interfere in
the price of any work, except such COM
pensation for has been fixed by law. Here it is;
read, and "boo" little for u.s.
OFFICE OF FATToRNEY-GENERAI,
ToPEK,, KAN, January Il, 1873
Hon. II. s. SoOk, County Attorney, Chase Co., Kun.
DEAR SIR: BY letter of the 10th inst. you say:
"What is your construction Of the laws of 1872 page
2i6, giving Commissioners control over County print
ing, delinquent tax and other County expenses C
missioners to charge the prices fixed by law print
ing delinquent taxlis road notices. etc., or to what
extent the Commissioners bound by any bids that
might be offered to do the County printing and their
powers to fix any of the compensation for the same
Or have they simply the right to select the papers to
do the work at the rates fixed by lawf Or if two
bids should be offered, have they the power to say
which paper should do the work, regardless ofprces
Please give me your construction, and oblige"
Responding, have to say:
Section l, chapter I0s laws 1872 purports to amend
section 36, article chapter % general statutes 1863
Does it repeal said section 46l hold that does
for his purpose, it fully complies with the require
mcnts of article section 6, State Constitution BY
comparing the two sections You will that section
I, chapter l0s laws 1872 is section 36 chapter 25 gen
eral statutes 1863 rerbdtD,. until you reach the prori
to the latter Section 36) which proviso is then
dropped by section l, of the act of 1872 Section IL,
chapter 49, general statutes 1863 fires printers fees
for certain ,cork which is contemplated by section
chapter l0S laws 1872, above referred to, and is
in full force The term ecisire control does not give
the Board of County Commissioners any power to
set aside this statute. That term has more power
in the deRdatory act than it had in the act repealed
This term, ereinsire control, means among other
things, that the Commissioners, to the exclusion of
other County officers shall have entire charge of the
matters named and implied in said act of 1872 There
other matters pertaining to their duties under
that act, in discharge Of which they exercise
clusre control But in the of this eIeiusire
control they set aside any requirement of
other statutes unrepcdied and bearing the subject
matter about which they attempting to exercise
control. To illustrate: If they can change and low
er the fired by law for specified part Of the work
contemplated by the of 1872 they can by parity
of reasoning, prohibit the County Treasurer from pub
fishing in a newspaper the delinquent taxlist, d
rected in section 107 chapter 81 laws oflS6 because
ii costs much, etc. Having said this much con-
clue that, all printing required to he done for
the County, and for which the fees fired by
ton H. article 2 chapter 25 general statutes 1865
the County Commissioners have exclusive power todes-
gnate the printer printers who shall do the work.
and the paper papers in which advertisements shall
be printed but they have power to change the fees
fixed therefor; nor is there any law authorizing them
to dispose of the County printing by bids.
2. If there be any portion of County printing re-
quired by the of 1872 any other law, and for
which the fees fired then they have ereinsire
control to the amount of compensation, and may
fix such rates as they may deem proper, or con-
tract for.
3 think the printer is entitled the fees fixed by
law for any part of the printing which he may con-
tract to do for the County.
Very respectfully,
WILLARD DAVIS,
Attorney General
c. xlatv 81; IL