Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1905-03-18
as the investigation has acquainted US

as the fnVeStigatlon mas oeqN
with the facts.
Our attention was called at one OF
more of our hearings to the 1act lna'
the Itemized statement turnlsneu .he
committee by the printer, snoWH's
somewhat in detail the printing 1or
1904, die not contain certain kenhepe'
Journals furnished State officiais lot
that year. or certain bills for advertis'
ing tax sales in the Journal. or cer'aiii
charges for publishing in the Joui,'i
proclamations Of the Governor. we
ruled, however, that these matters
were not within the scope OF our III
uuiry, nOtwithsta ndng the circu'"
stance that the public printer Is an"
was one of the owners of the kellnep1c
Journal 1t subsequently appeared 'hat
one or more Of these plils' ho-
included in the general statement
was paid, by order of the Governor
and Council, out of the genera
prtnting appropriation. But we still
hold that such charges are not for Sta'e
printing. within the meaning OF me
statute. or the legislative order, ana
the fact that they were not suo'''t.eo
to the auditor does not alter our oplh-
ion that printing bills, payapie OUT VI
the general appropriation. that should
have been submitted to the auditor
have been so submitted, properly ah-
dite,l by him and paid out OF the treas
ur>. at the statute rates. We deem 1T
nroper. however, to place the Legisla-
ture in possession Of the facts, in re-
spect to these outside charges, and to
add that what is true of such charges,
for the year 1904, appears to be true
also, of previous years.
An important matter. to which our
attention was also called. is the reuse
of saved or standing type. and the
printing ahead of more work than is
ordered, in anticipation Of other or
ders, and with the risk Of loss, il the
anticipation is not realized. The ques-
ton was whether, in such cases, the
printer is entitled to make a second
charge for composition without hav-
ing actually set up the type a second
time. The overwhelming weight of the
evidence was, and we accordingly find
that under a statute or contract con-
tanning no provision to the contrary.
printers have right to any savings
accruing from standing type. or from
printing ahead of orders: and we fur
Their find that when the present stat
ute was enacted, the right of the pub
lie printer to such savings was consid-
cred by the Legislature in fixing the
statute rates. If the present statute is
repealed. however, future contracts
should express the understanding of
the parties in this respect.
tn iyr,nn Mt nf
this branch of the inquiry, namely, the
question, "What prices should be paid
for the work under existing condi-
tions,' we regret to be obliged to re-
port that the question is so abstruse
and technical. and is so complicated by
the relation to it of the volume of
printing. and the time which the COM
mittee has been able to devote to that
special question is so limited, that we
are unable to make any definite an
swer to it. though such answer may
not be needed if the main recommen-
dation of this report be adopted. When
the law, as now, undertakes to estab-
fish fixed and unvarying price for
varying classes of printing. such prices
must of necessity be based on what is
deemed fair average of the work
done; ana as i'm all averages. some
items will be above, and some below,
the standard of exact compensation. 1t
is difficult for legislative committee
even with the assistance of skilled
properly to adjust prices to meet
changing conditions. Under the pres
ent law. prices can be changed only by
act IF 70 LAT Tn 40 IF
the committee prices may be more
fairly and easily determined by COM
petitive bids than by legislative in
quiry. Mainly, therefore. because of
inherent difficulties in fixing prices by
law, but partly because we have been
unable TO determine what are fair
prices under existing conditions. or
what profit to the public printer has
resulted from the statute rate-infOr-
nation, which the printer himself is
unable to furnish. owing to the fact
that the State printing is only one de-
partment of his business. we deem it to
be in the interest of the State to re-
peal the existing law creating the Of
flee of public printer. and to author
iZe the Governor and Council 10 con-
tract for the State printing Oh the baS-
is Of competitive bids. and we 50 rec
omrnend. The Office of State auditor
however, should not be abolished. and
the act aholishing the Office OF public
printer should give that official reason
able time to complete work now on
hand, and ADJUST his business to the
change. We suggest that he will be af-
forded such reasonable time. if the re-
pealing act take effect January first,
1906. The existing law WAS enacted in
1873. and took effect January first. 1897.
We. accordingly submit the accom-
panying bill. embodying the recommen-
dations last made herein, and report
that it ought to pass.
(Signed) HESELTON.
POTTER,
KNOWLTON,
SEWALL.
KIMBALL,