Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1905-12-30

Iva.
oi1erence enough to talk about. but fig,ir
inS IL on the. basis of average editions of
4lho. II makes Il difference of hundreds Of
dollars" ' Vi
IL Will be observed that Mr.. Bowler
hsures as though the press work on
each separate report We're ONLY n single
run, whereas they vary from one RIM
10 Al runs, and right here occurs an
example of Mr.. Bowler's agility in
dodSing facts. For instance, the small
est edition on the list of 40 renorts 10
winch he refers was one of 1875. and was
only one run of press work, while the
largest as matter Of fact, was an edi-
ton OF 5000 with Al runs of press work.
The reader will readily see that in
order to get correct average on press
work between 125 copies of a report of
one run of press work and one of eOoO
copies of a report Of Al runs of press
work, the report of 5000 should count as
thouSh II We're Al reports. In no other
way can fair" average be arrived at.
The contrast above noted is not an ey-
ports Of small editions are generally
from public institutions and the num-
Der Of runs of press work that enters
into them is very small AS a rule a
small edition indicates Il small report.
These small reports taken all together
would scarcely equal i'll the matter Of
press work ANA stock that which enters
q single one of the largest and most inn
portant reports figured by the Governor
ana Councils printing expert. Even
those who are not practical printers
will see the trickcry of comparing a re-
port of 4 single run Of press work with
one of Al runs of press work, as if each
of them had only n single run Of pres;
work. They will perceive that instead
of being upon the same basis for pur-
poses of comparison, as Mr.. Bowler so
blandly assumes, the report of Al runs
would in fact equal in press work and
stock just Al reports OF a Single run
each, provided. of course, the same
number Of copies We're printed in each
instance.
The fact that Hurleigh & FIynts bid
for press work on all runs over 1000 was
considerably below his does not excuse
Mr.. Bowler for this palpable attempt to
deceive the public into the belief that
the various reports of the State have
precisely the same number of press
runs. and can therefore all be averaged
press work. Mr.. Bowlers method OF
figuring his press work was Il unique
one, but we scarcely think it was one
that will be generally adopted by the
printers of Maine. He first assumes
that each of the 40 reports consist of 4
single run of press work. Then he adds
the editions together and secures n
total of 14,12O. This he divides by 40
and gravely announces that the aver
Now, as q matter Of fact. one single
report in his list Ohe AgriculturaD
contains Al runs of press work or
total of $4,000. In other words, this
single report contains nearly four
times the volume Of press work that
Mr.. Bowler figures for the entire 40 re-
ports upon which his above quoted
average was based!
In this connection we will state that
since Mr.. Bowler made the above fig
ures. assuming apparently that the 40
reports upon which they We're based
state work. a list of SO additional books
and pamphlets has been sent him
at his request. or these So books
and pamphlets only two had ed-
tons of less than a thousand.
Twelve had editions of 10000 or over;
five had editions of 800 nine had edi-
tions of 5000; seven had editions of 1000
or over. With this further data at his
disposal it would certainly seem incum-
bent anon Mr.. Bowler to revise his pub
lished figures on press work, even if he
should still adhere to his very original
plan of allowing only one run of press
work to each report. and figuring aver
ages of press work upon the basis of
editions.
We take great pleasure in calling the
attention of the printers of Maine to
the foregoing facts as bearing some
what pointedly upon the manner in
| which Mr. Bowler has made his figures
upon the State reports.
The above report Of the Labor bu-
reau is the only one which Mr.. Bowler
at the date of this writing, says he has
| undertaken to figure in detail. lie
| seems to prefer to figure the State re-
ports in general upon basis of per-
centages, apparently believing that this
is a fair way to figure such matters
He says: