Burlington free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1827-1865, 1846-04-10

certainty OF legal d,Scrcft0h, when so""'
ted TO large number of different boards,
from whose allowance there is no appeal or
revision. This is however not a solitary or
perhaps the strongest case, ot discrepant
practices resulting, necessarily, from the I'M
fortunate condition of our laws on this sub
ject.
Since the revision in 1899, Clerks lave
charged aud have been allowed from 5O cts.
to 81 90 and over for rendering judgments,
in addition to rs cents allowed by the Statute
for entering "A judgment in the S. Court, and
40 cents, on trial IN the County Court. Be-
fore the revision, the Statute, settling the ices
for entering judgments, had these words OF
explanation, viz, " including rendering the
same" but in the Statute of 1889 these words
are omitted, and the practice has become
general to charge for the record.
Charges from Sl,00 to $3.50 are made
for making debenlure Of the Grand Jury and
the same for Petit Jurors, and of 81 100 to
81 ,25 for setting with a panel Of Jurors
The services, for which these fees are charg-
ed, originated under law of 1907, and the
fees prescribed by that act, as compensation
for the service, was 81, 90 only. The duty
of the Clerk was to make the debenure,
keep the account of the Jury fees and set
tie with the Jurors. This was required by
the Statute, ard the legal fee was 81 ,OO;-
now 10y innovation or construction, or usage,
in some sases over $500, is paid for this SER
vice. Nor is this all. Slnce the act of 49,
~, the Clerks are paid for this service in
another way, or this service is included "a
mong others, for which another compcnsa-
ton is allowed, and still their charges contin-
ne to be made, and in some Counties, includ-
ed Court debcnturc amount 10 about so, U,
above and beyo nd the provisions OF the law.
In about one third of the Counties it has
been customary to enter the returns OF in
quests of the dead, on the dockets of the
Courts,at a considerable expense TO the State.
This useless expense has fallen little shor, OF
S3),O year in some Counties. No posi-
BILE reason can be given for such a practice,
other than means Of adding TO the fees OF
certain officers, and this reason has been
4 frankly assigned as the origin Of the practice.
Other practices have prevailed, of a char
acler similar 10 those above described, all
involving loss to the Treasury Of probably
over 50, 10000 per year, all Of which would
have been saved, by limiting allowances Ia
the proportion to fees established by law"
Capias. to apprehend criminals or persons
charged with offences against the laws, have
been generally charged al 81 90, though
sometimes at 81 90 but II allowed at IA
rate proportional 10 fees established by law,
the charge charge would probably be g cents.
but certainly not over 81 cents " entries
for Jurors and State prison warrants are
charged al similar rates, and are subject to
similar remarks.
The act Of 1912 provided what was hop
ed, would prove IA remedy for these wastes
Of the public funds, by reducing all to legal
standard. THIS provision was tor the pro-
mitigation of rules applicable to every vari-
ant practice. In February 1911 the auditor
applied 10 tie Judges Of the Supreme Court
to establish rules Of practice, to be observed
in all the Courts Of law in the State, winch
should secure the uniformity. Time and
other circumstances not tavorIng the applIca-
ton. it was deferred ill Jhly following, when
a statement OF the practices calling Tor the
interposilion Of Court, with draft of such
rules ns the case seemed 10 require, and rea-
sons for their adoption was presented TO the
Court; but nothing was accomplished. -
Members Of the Court urged, that II was PEI
culiarly the duty of the Legislature to inter-
pose in this matter. In October 1914, the
Legislature passed law making ii the duty
of the auditor, TO settle the Clerks accounts
and $50 far as he finds it practicable and jus,
allow to each Clerk the same sums for like
services" The law thus imposed duty