Hon. M. A. SMITH, MISCELLANEOUS. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION. UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, Washington, D. C., March 27, 1919. Chairman Joint Committee on Printing, United States Senate. SIR: The commission is in receipt of your circular letter of March 12, in regard to the provisions of section 11 of Public Act No. 314, Sixty-fifth Congress, approved March 1, 1919. In reply thereto the commission advises you that it does not publish a journal, periodical, or magazine contemplated by that act. By direction of the commission. Very respectfully, MARTIN A. MORRISON, President. COURTS. OFFICE OF THE CLERK, COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Washington, D. C., March 24, 1919. Hon. MARK A. SMITH, SENATOR: I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of your circular letter of March 12 with reference to Public Act No. 314, Sixty-fifth Congress, approved March 1, 1919, paragraph 3 of which provides, among other things, that after July 1 next all printing, binding, and blankbook work, etc., shall be done at the Government Printing Office. The amount appropriated for the conduct of this office is $1,000 a year. Heretofore our bills for printing have run less than $350 a year. The principal items of work of this character are the court calendar, printed three times a year, binding of records and briefs once a year, and the usual blank forms for the current business of the office. In view of the proposed change in the method of printing, I have just secured from the Government Printing Office estimates on the main items of our printing expenditures, namely, the printing of the court calendar and binding up records and briefs. Last year the average cost for each edition of the calendar (three in all) was $82, or a total for the year of $246. The prices just given me by the Government Printing Office are: For the first edition, $187.68, and for each succeeding edition (old forms being used), two editions in all, at about $135 each, $270, or a total for the year of $457.68. From this it would seem that the cost of our calendars alone during the coming year, if printed at the Government Printing Office. will considerably exceed the amount we have heretofore expended for all of our printing, and be almost 50 per cent of the amount allowed for all purposes. In addition to the increase in the cost of calendars, there will also be a considerable increase in the cost of binding records and briefs, as follows: Bid for binding obtained from a local firm, $2.15 for buckram, and $2.50 for leather, per volume, both large and small: whereas the bid of the Government Printing Office is $2.50 for buckram and $3 for leather, small volumes, and $1 per volume extra for the large volumes. With reference to the last paragraph of your letter in which you state that you hope to secure cooperation in the committee's efforts to effect needed economy in the public printing and binding, I would state that I shall be very glad to cooperate to the extent of my ability. In view, however, of our limited appropriation and the special character of our work, and the circumstances as to prices above reeited. I shall be under many obligations if you will kindly inform me if it was the intention of the committee to bring this office under the provisions set forth in your letter. This inquiry is made purely for the reason that if it is, a deficiency will result and steps must be taken to provide for the same. Very respectfully, HENRY W. HODGES, Clerk. JOINT COMMITTEE ON PRINTING, May 2, 1919. The PUBLIC PRINTER, Government Printing Office. DEAR SIR: The committee is in receipt of the inclosed letter from The clerk of the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia, calling #ftention to estimates from the Government Printing Office on painting for that court which are considerably in excess of the Charges for similar printing made by commercial establishments. Will you kindly look into this matter and advise me as to the easons, if any, for the increased charges which the clerk of the Furt of appeals states that the Printing Office proposes to make for the printing of that court? It is, of course, a vital matter if the Government establishments which are required by section 11 of Public Act No. 314, to have all their printing done at the Government Printing Office after July 1. 1919. are to be obligated to pay largely increased prices for such inting. I have been of the opinion, especially in view of your former statements to the committee, that the work could be done at The Government Printing Office as cheaply as by any commercial esablishment. If this is not the case, will you kindly advise the com...ttee as to the reasons for the difference in charges? Respectfully, yours, EDGAR R. KIESS, Acting Chairman. OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC PRINTER, SIR: I have the honor, in the absence of the Public Printer, to acknowledge receipt of your letter of recent date, with which you inclosed copy of communication received by the Joint Committee on Printing from the clerk of the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia, calling attention to estimates from the Government Printing Office on printing for that court, which were considerably in excess of charges for similar printing made by commercial establishments, and in which you request that the matter be looked into, and that you be advised as to the reasons, if any, for the increased charges. In reply I wish to state that this matter has been carefully investigated, and it is found that the estimate submitted to the representative of the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia was cut to the lowest possible figure for a publication of 128 pages and cover (64 pages 8-point tabular and 64 folioed blank pages) to meet his plea of a small appropriation. He made no statement as to how cheap he was getting this work executed on the outside, and apparently was well satisfied with the estimate furnished him by this office. It is believed that the figures given him and the statement made as to outside charges for printing this work were based on an old estimate, as in view of the present high cost of material, wages, etc., and comparative figures and charges recently made by this office with outside work would show that the charges were uniformly much higher, and it is not understood how this could be so much cheaper in the present case. Relative to the question of binding, I have to say that no samples were submitted by the representative of the Court of Appeals, who secured the estimates, but he was advised that such estimates were based on the binding of briefs, etc., for the Supreme Court of the United States, which are very thick books and of a nature that require considerable extra work. The average cost of binding octavo volumes in buckram is $1.50 a volume; if in leather $2 a volume, and these were the figures given based as above stated. If the books are of a nature that do not require any extra work outside of the ordinary method of binding, this would reduce the price. The same statement in regard to outside prices for printing also pertain and apply to binding, and it is not thought that the work can be produced any cheaper than in the Government Printing Office. For your information I am inclosing a copy of the estimate and also sample of the work required. Through an oversight your letter was misplaced; hence the delay in answering. Yours, respectfully, D. V. CHISHOLM, Acting Public Printer. CHAIRMAN JOINT COMMITTEE ON PRINTING, United States Senate. ESTIMATE FOR PRINTING AND BINDING. Requisiton No.: Informal; date, March 24, 1919; department. Court of Ap peals, District of Columbia. Title, Calendar-Court of Appeals-8 point tabular, printed on left-hand pages; right-hand memorandum blanks; 128 pages and cover; 60 copies; pickup and corrections. Clerk, Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia. DEAR SIR: On receipt of your letter of March 24, 1919, in reference to printing for the Court of Appeals, the committee submitted to the Public Printer your statement in regard to estimates from the Government Printing Office on printing for the Court of Appeals. Inclosed herewith is a copy of the Public Printer's reply, which I transmit for your information. Respectfully, COURT OF CLAIMS. REED SMOOT, Chairman OFFICE OF THE CLERK, UNITED STATES COURT OF CLAIMS, Washington, D. C., March 25, 1919. SIR: I am replying to your circular letter of the 12th instant, in which it is requested that your committee be furnished with information concerning publications referred to in paragraph 2 thereof. In compliance therewith, I have to inform you that no journal, magazine, periodical, or other similar publication is printed or issued by authority of this court, nor is any printing whatever authorized by it except that specifically authorized by law. Respectfully, Hon. MARK A. SMITH, SAML. A. PUTMAN, Chief Clerk. Congress of the United States. Chairman Joint Committee on Printing, UNITED STATES COURT OF CUSTOMS APPEALS. HON. REED SMOOT, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Chairman Joint Committee on Printing, United States Senate. MY DEAR SENATOR: I beg to inclose herewith, for the consideration of the Joint Committee on Printing, a letter received by me from the clerk of the United States Court of Custom Appeals, Washington, D. C., requesting, for the reasons stated in his communication, that in respect to the printing of transcripts of records an exception be made to the rule requiring that all printing for the Government shall be done at the Government Printing Office. I respectfully request that, if practicable, the request of the clerk be granted. Respectfully, W. MITCHELL PALMER, Washington, June 30, 1919. UNITED STATES COURT OF CUSTOMS APPEALS, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Washington, D. C. SIR: Before awarding the bid for printing the transcripts of records of cases before this court for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1920, I beg to request that you secure the consent of the Joint Committee on Printing to make the United States Court of Customs Appeals an exception (in respect only to transcripts of records) to the rule that all printing for the Government shall be done at the Government Printing Office. In approximately half the cases before this court the Government is appellant and bears the cost of printing the record. In the other half of the cases private litigants bear the cost of printing. The printing of records here, as in most courts, has always been done by a private printer. Private litigants could not have their printing done by the Government Printing Office, and if the Government were not granted an exception in this instance the result would be that half the records would be printed by one establishment and half by another, which would not be for the best interests of orderly procedure either for the court or for the parties litigant. Furthermore, in cases of cross appeals the expense of printing the record is equally divided between the Government and the private litigant. If an exception is not made, how and by whom could such a record be printed?" The contract for printing records is awarded each year to the lowest responsible bidder, and in past years the results have been satisfactory to the court, the Government and private litigants. Hence the request that the Clerk may be allowed to continue this practice. Respectfully, ARTHUR B. SHELTON, Clerk. |