The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1892-11-30
PrOmulgating the Laws.

IEOmulShtlHS thO huNbs
Respecting the matter of the promul-
CATION of the laws by the newspapers,
the Rutland Herald says:
The pay was for long time fixed sum
for each paper, and two years ago, largely
through the efforts of Representative
Humphrey of the Poultney Journal law
was made fixing the pay according to the
amount printed and the circulation of the
paper. That was all right in theory, but in
practice promulgating the laws" through
the newspapers in 1890 cost the state of YER
mont over $4,000 This was bit too much,
and a law made at the session just ended
cuts off the newspaper publication altogether
and provides that distribution shall be made
somehow directly by the secretary of state.
How the arrangement will satisfy the pub
lie remains to be seen. How it will please
the newspapers anybody can guess. 1t is
unfortunately true that the bill did not show
on its face what was done-the gist of it was
all in blind repeating clause-and few OF
the members of the legislature knew any
thing about it. And gossip has it that the
scheme had one end in the job department
of the Burlington Free Press and another in
Brattleboro. Perhaps the outcome will be
an arrangement reasonable and satisfactory
all around. The state should promulgate
the laws " somehow, so that the people can
have them, the newspapers can do the work
cheaply and effectively, and there should
be fair play and no "grab" about the bust
ness.
The Herald is in error in two i'm
portant particulars: First, by Act No.
1913, laws of 1882, the newspapers were
paid for publishing the laws, " one dol
lar and fifty cents per hundred of cir
culation, provided that no paper shall
receive more than $50 nor less than
SO" The Humphrey act of 1890 re-
imbursed the newspapers for the cost
of the law supplements, and paid them
S1.50 per hundred of circulation. Out
of this latter sum were to come ex-
pressage, postage and cost of m ling
what was left was the publishers profit.
Second, the cost of PRONUNCIATION
under the Humphrey act was reported
by the judiciary committee at 50 300
not $1,000, as the Herald has it. Our
contemporary should join the prohibit
ton party or take course at the Kelley
Institute.
Our editorial paragraph on this mat
ter, republished from the DAILY JOUR-
NAL, will be found on page three. 1t
may be said further, as we understand,
that the Judiciary committee found that
while it cost the state some 81 400 to
publish $500 copies of the laws in book
form, it cost 50 300 to publish and dis
tribute 100 900 copies in newspaper
form. Therefore, the conclusion was,
the newspapers are bleeding the state;
and so, after having tapped the states
jugular and bled her profusely for vari-
Gus objects-worthy and otherwise-the
further effusion of the vital fluid was
stayed by summarily tying up the little
artery through which flowed bare suf.
ficiency to provide for printing and dis
tributing some 100000 copies of the
public enactments among the $50 900
people who are compelled to know
what laws have been made and to obey
them. This is one of the things oil
which the legislature has no right to be
proud.
AS to the Herdlds insinuation of a
job: OF this we know nothing. 1t is
true that after the bill had passed the
senate, certain senators began to real
ize how bad law they had participated
in making, and the house was asked tt
return the bill to the possession of the
senate. In the house the member who
moved to so return the bill was info rmet
that it was not in the possession of the
house. Inquiry in the executive de
partment showed fully and truly tina
the bill was not there; the authorities
in that official precinct had not seen i
and knew nothing of its whereabouts
About four o'clock in the morning, how
ever, when house and senate had beef
, demoralized and decimated by the hard
ships of an all-night session, the bill
: suddenly turned up in the executive
= chamber. Whence it came, deponen
saith not. 1t had apparently been i
: hiding somewhere-possibly to proven
e its return to the legislative department
3 possibly not. Possibly there was a
=. African in the wood-pile; possibly moi
JOSIAH K. DEWEY, who represented MID
. dlebury in the last Legislature is sufferin