Year: 1876

Secretary or the Sergeant-at-Arms c


the Senate performs his duties.
| AS an officer of the Senate, tn


Congressional Printer is not subjec


to impeachment, because only officer


of the United States, or persons VIII


have held such Office, are liable to i'm


peachment.


From this it follows that nsithe


the House nor committee of tn


House has any authority or jurisdic


tion to inquire into the conduct o


the Congressional Printer with I


view to impeachment, or for the pur


pose of passing any criticism upoI


the manner in which he has perform


ed his duties. 1t is believed that thi:


House would be very restive shoult
the Senate institute investigations il
regard to the mannar in which the
officers of this House perform theil
respective duties.


But it Is due to this House to say
that the resolution under which the
Committee on Printing has proceed
ed contemplated no such action, but
intended only an inquiry upon which
subsequent Legislation, if found nee
essary should be based.


I therefore dissent from so much oi
the report of the committee as pre-
tends to criticise or censure the con
duct of the Congressional Printer;
upon the ground, first, that the com
mittee was charged by the House
with no duty in that behalf; and Sec
ondly, because, even conceding that
the resolution could be construed as
giving such authority, it was beyond
the jurisdiction of the House, and ut
terly void.


l also dissent from all that part of
the report, because in my opinion the
testimony fails to show case justi-
flying any harsh criticism or condem-
nation of the Congressional Printer.


Ipass without particular mention
the course pursued by the committee
in the examination of witnesses, the
fact that the examination was held
in secret, and exhibited a purpose to
travel beyond what was necessary to
form the basis of legislation to cast
discredit upon the Printer. But
from the testimony as taken l am un-
able to find any just ground for con
demnation in regard to the manner
in which the business of this branch
of the public service has been con-
Quoted. In one or two unimportant
particulars there may have been
such departures from the strict letter
of the law as lawyers would denomi-
nate irregularities. But in no in
stance has the treasury been defraud-
ed of a cent; and in no instance is it
even pretended that tho Printer. or
any friend of his, has profted one
cent from any contract, business ar
rangement, or transaction of his Of
flee. Indeed, the proof, elected by
questions not very friendly to the
Printer proves the negative aflirma-
lively.


There is, therefore, no ground upon
which any censorious criticism of the
Printer can be based.


1t is said that the Departments
have been charged too much for
printing and binding. But it is to
be borne in mind that appropriations
of definite sums are made for the
printing and binding of each Depart
ment, and when that limit is reached
their printing and binding must
stop; so that the only result of
charging Department too much is
to limit the amount of its printing
and binding, and every overcharge is
a diminution of it's quantum of print
ing, and pro tantO a saving to the
Government. In no case does any
money pass between the Departments
and the Printer on this account, and
in no event can he be benefited by
an overcharge to a Department.,


1t is said that the Printer has
paid too much for material, and that
by resorting to manufacturers better
terms might have been made. This,
however, is mere matter of opinion;
and the witnesses relied upon to es
tablish the charge had such manifest
interest in changing the policy of the
Government with regard to its own
printing and binding as to greatly
diminish the weight of their testi
mony. In this particular, also, the
testimony shows that the Printer was
in no way interested or benefited, and
that the persons with whom he dealt
did not, on the average, make more
than Is per cent. above actual cost,
which, in view of the amount of
stock they had to keep on hand, in
volving heavy insurance and interest
on the investment, cannot be regard
ed as an unreasonable profit.


/ Icannot avoid the olnViotion that
the majority not only forgot the pri-
NAL object of the investigation as set
forth in the resolution under which
they acted, but that they were large
ly influenced by desire to e-instate
Franklin Rives to the profitable
printing Of the proceedings and de-
bates of Congress, even at a much
higher rate than the Government is
at present paying therefor, and that,
too, by positive enactment in his ia
vor, without opening the work to
competition.


1t is impossible to overlook the
fact that the testimony of many of
the printers, who have been willing
witnesses, may have been prompted
by the hope that by destroying the
present system they would acquire
profitable contracts with the Depart
ments.


1t is my. belief that the present
system should be adhered to, as the
most convenient, economical, and sat
isfactory method of doing the Gov
ornmant prinfinu. ond fhat 6anor