The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1918-02-14
STATE BUYING WOULD
CUT EXPENSES DEEPLY
Delegate Hall, of Loudoun. Outlines
Provisions of His Bill Which
Would CentraIizc Purchase.

"If the taxpayers of Virginia want
to cave hundreds of thousands OF dol
lars on the running expenses OF the
state government, il they want econ
ony and increased efficiency theh
they should insist upon the enastnieh ,.
of the proposed state purchasing pll''
says Delegate Hall. of Loudoun.
Mr. Hall is co-patron with senator
Jeffreys on the bill establishing state
purchasing commission for the pur-
chase OF equipment, material and sup
plies for the state, it's institutions
boards, departments. bureaus ana OF
ficers. He will have charge OF the
measure when 1t comes TO the mouse
from the senate, which 1t Is expec'eo
will pass the bill as reported from
committee.
Reports from ten different states
show that a central state purcnsslhE
com mission would result IN saving
thousands and thousands of dollars,
said Mr.. Hall. I'm every one of these
states" continued Mr.. Hall, entire
satisfaction with the system Is re-
ported, and not only is there an I'm
mense saving in cost, but the quality
OF supplies of all kinds purchased TOR
the state show an improvement
eficiency should he the watchword,
we should not hesitate to enact thia
plan into law. The immense savins
thus to be made for the state can
be made an accomplish 81 fact with
out reducing q single salary.
"Oficial figures show that the pur-
chasing department for the state OF
Texas saved q total Of s2s4.S0T over
the cost OF purchasing supplies IN
dependently by the departments. This
saving waa on a total purchase OF
sl.4s2.s21, made for twentyone state
departments and institutions.
Some Of the items on which this
saving in Texas was made are as fol-
lowe; Flour. $4,000; fuel oil. sss.'
$50; dry-goods s26,24+. hardware.
$26.ss6; meat, s2T.S0
From the great state of Psnnsyl'
vania. after thorough test OF the
state purchasing agent system. the
report is made that before the system
was adopted there was neither econ
omy nor good quality by the non~com-
petitive method and independent buy
ing BY each department with the
adoption OF the system came large
saving. uniform prices and superior
quality.
IN that state in the last year Of
the old system prices varied approx
mately 100 per cent in most cases for
goods of the same quality in list In
GLIDING beef. pork, butter. tea, co1ee
sugar and other groceries,
From the state OF Vermont comes
a report showing a saving of $4,000
on -four alone.
I'm West Virginia there IL pur'
chasing agent for the twenty five state
Institutions. and while the executive
departm ents are not sodirected by law
they obtain their supplies through the
purchasing agent to profit by tho low
err prices for the same quality ~
goods.
From Nebraska New Hampshire
Ohio. Oklahoma, ana Wisconsin, come
similar reports OF the economy and
efrisSenrv Of the system proposed FOR
adoption by Virginia IN this bill.
s'Besides affecting this saving in
money. uniform price and grade
Of supplies will make 4 easier 10 de-
terrnine by comparison as TO the legi-
innate cost OF maintenance OF the diff
fe~ent institutions and tend 10 eS-
pose fuefflctencv ana fltsmangencrt
In addition 20 the direct economy Il
be effected by the bin II VIII have g
strong influence IN prevaating T.
travagance,
While II ia not supposed nor Is !;
charged that the heads of the state
institutions and departments are not
honestly endeavorinR 20 do the hes'
they can for the state, nevertheless
this system would practically elimi
nate the possibility OF COLLISION he,
tween the purchaser and the seller. >