Gregory Consolidated Mining Co., Starr v. (two cases) 485, 491 | Milligan v. Savery... 129 .... Moutana Cent. R'y Co. v. Hel ena & R. M. R. Co.......... 416 Montana Copper Co. v. Dahl.. 131 Montana National Bank v. Schmidt... 323 Montana R'y Co. v. Warren.. 275 609 CASES ARGUED AND DETERMINED IN THE SUPREME COURT, AT THE JANUARY TERM, 1886. WOOLFOLK ET AL., appellants, v. WOOLMAN, AUDItor, etc., respondents. PUBLIC PRINTING - Rates under act of January 21, 1876.- Plaintiffs entered into a contract to do certain public printing, under the statute of January 21, 1876, which did not prescribe any fixed rates, but provided that for such printing the rates paid should be the same as those paid by the government of the United States, and prescribed by the treasury department. The rates paid by the United States government at the time the contract was made were lower than those which were established at the date of the passage of the act. Held, that the plaintiffs were only entitled to be paid the rates as prescribed at the date of their contract. Appeal from Third District, Lewis and Clarke County. THE opinion states the facts. MASSENA BULLARD, for the appellant. T. J. LOWRY, for the respondent. GALBRAITH, J. The facts submitted in the statement as agreed upon in this case are as follows: That on the 21st VOL VI-1 day of January, 1876, the legislature of Montana enacted the following provision in relation to printing, viz.: “For the printing of bills and other matter for the use of, and ordered by, the legislative assembly, and reports printed in pamphlet form, the rates paid by the United States government under the laws thereof, and under the rules prescribed by the treasury department of the United States." That after the passage of the act, of which the above provision is a part, the appellants, who were the proprietors of a newspaper printed in this territory, contracted in the manner provided by law to do the territorial printing at the rates provided in the above act, which contract is still in force. That since the date of the passage of the above act the rates of compensation paid by the United States government under the laws thereof, and under the rules prescribed by the treasury department, have fluctuated; and such rates are at present somewhat lower than at the date of the printing act aforesaid. That the plaintiffs recently printed in pamphlet form the report of the territorial superintendent of public instruction, and demand for such work the rates paid for similar work by the United States government at the date of the passage of the printing act aforesaid. That the defendant refuses to audit the plaintiffs' account at such rates, and only proposes to allow the present rate of compensation paid by the government of the United States for such work. The appellants, therefore, desire that an order of mandamus be issued directing the said auditor to draw his warrant upon the territorial treasurer for the amount due them for such work, computed at the rates paid by the United States government at the date of the passage of the act concerning printing. Upon the hearing of the above statement, the court ordered that the said defendant audit the demand of plaintiff's at the rates allowed under the laws of the United States and the rules prescribed by the treasury department at the time the contract was made, instead of the rates so allowed and prescribed at the time the work mentioned in the said |