The voice of freedom. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1839-1848, 1846-04-02
% August 3lst, l843 was Tor the County

RutIanu, UtlU . rankNn, U, 20
Windsor, O,l0 Lamoille, O,37.7
Addison, 0l3 Orleans, O,20.7
Orange, OILS. Grand Isle, OH.
Chitenden, 0,l9.2 Essex, 0,l5,7
The lowest rate of charge exhibited in
the above table exceeds the Statute price
for copying. more than 200, and the high
esl more than 600 per cent. This table
we believe will furnish fair commentary
upon the uncertainty of legal discretion,
when committed to large number of diff.
ferent boards. from whose allowance there
is no appeal or revision. This is howev-
er not a solitary or perhaps the strongest
case, of discrepant practices resulting, nee
essarIy, from the unfor uaae condition Of
our laws on This subject.
Since the revision in 1889, Clerks have
charged ard have been allowed from so
cents to $500 and over for rendering
judgments. in addition 10 Is cents allowed
by the Statute, for entering a judgment in
the Supreme Court, and 40 cents, on trial
in the County Court. Before the revision,
The Statute, settling the fees for entering
judgments, had these words of explains
,tioo, viz, "ncIading rendering the same,''
bur in the Statute of 1889 these words are
omitted, and The practice has become gen.
eral to charge for the record.
Charges from 81, 90 TO $3.50 are MADE
Tor making debenure Of the Grand Jury
and the same for Petit Jurors, and OF 81, 90
to 50 25 for settling with a panel Of Jurors.
The services, for which these fees are
charged, originated under law Of 1907,
and the fees prescribed by that act, as
compensation for the service, was LOO
only. The duty Of the Clerk was to make
the debenlure, keep the account of the Ju.
ry fees, aud setieswih the Jurors. This
was required by the Statute, and the legal
fee was $l,00 nov by innovation Or
construction, or usage, in some cases over
S. 90, is paid for this service. Nor is
this ALL Since the act Of l842, the Clerks
are paid for this service in another way,
or this service is included among others,
for which another compensation is allows
ed, and still their charges continue 10 be
made, and in some Counties, including
Court debenure amount 10 about $25, 100,
above and beyond the provisions of the
law.
10 about ore third of the Counties it
has been customary 10 enter the returns Of
inqlesls Of the dead on the dockets Of the
Couts, at a considerable expense to the
Stale This useless expense has fallen
Iule short Of $4,000 year in some Coun
lies. No possible reason can be given
for such practice, other than means Of
adding 10 the fees Of certain officers, and
this reason has been frankly assigned as
the origin of the practice.
Oher practices have prevailed, of a
character similar 10 those above described
all involving loss TO the Treasury o
probably over 100000 per year, all o
which would have been saved, by limit
log allowances to the proportion to fee'
established by law" Capias, 10 apprehen'
> criminals or persons charged with offence
: against the laws, have been general,
! charged at g. 90, though sometimes a
, S2,O0;-but if allowed at rate proper
, toned to fees established by law, the charg
would probably be 6 cents but cerainI
' not over 81 cents ;-Veniries for Juror
, and State prison warrants are charged a
e similar rates, and are subject 10 similar re
t marks.
> The act Of 1912 provided what wa
it hoped, would prove a remedy for 'hes
|, wastes of the public funds, by reducin
\ all to a legal standard. This provlsio
a was for The PRONUNCIATION OF rules applies
d bio 10 every variant practice. In Febru'
If nv 1914 the auditor applied 10 the judge
- Of The Supreme Court 10 establish rules
d practice, to be observed in all the Cour
v Of law in the State. which should secul
Is the desired uniformity. Time and olh'
" circumstances not favoring The applicaio
Is i. was deferred till July following, wh'
er statement of the practices calling for Il
of in,erposirion of Court, with draft of SUI
re rules as the case seemed 10 require, al
ii reasons for their adoption was present.