The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1853-06-07

9 Bill of Logan Hunton, district attorney, paid
and receipted October Is, 1850, amount
ing to. Observation-Disclosures. 50, 200
For fourteen criminal in lS49 and
1850. ....................... l,sIo
For four criminal examinations. 40
For one criminal examination ofseveral per-
sons charged with burning ship at sea,
which occupied twenty seven days, as
stated. ......-.-- ...............,... sou
The rendition of the services is duly certified;
and he district judge certified ss follows:
al have examined the charges made in the above
named criminal cases, and finding them reasona-
bic and proper have allowed the same.
THOMAS H. MCCALEB,
Omitted States Judge
3. Bill of said district attorney, paid January 5.
1851 amounting to the sum of. 500
For services in June, 1850, for a criminal exam.
iuation before Judge McCaleb and Commissioner
Baldw of United States Us n. Lopez, charged
with violation of the neutrality lave, proceed
ings had pursuant to orders from the Executive
Department.
Judge McCaeb certified that il was most
citing and protracted examination, and that he
approved and allowed the above charge of $50,
reasonable and proper.
This charge, for aught ] can see, is for por
ton of the same services included in the charge
of S $50 presented by Mr.. Hunton in February,
1858, and allowed by the Presidents and therefore
this charge of $500 cannot be allowed TO Mr.
Hunton without explanation showing more in
detail the services for which the two charges of
$500 and ST. $50 were made. The charge for
g. $50 is as follows, to witt
"For unofficial services and extraordinary
penses in the years 1850 and 1851, connected with
and growing out of invasons of the leland of
Cuba by military expeditions from the United
States, s $50"
Judge McCaleb certified that he had examined
the evidences of said services, and approved and
allowed the charge as reasonable.
President Fillmore approved and allowed the
same the 18th of February, 1853, under the 18th
section of the act of Congress, approved August
81, 1882 and the account was allowed by the &C
counting officers, and numbered lO9,3o2
All the foregoing accounts have been suspended
by the First Auditor, but having been made out
and certified in pursuance with instructions and
decisions OF Mr.. Comptroller McCuiloh, and OF
several years usage, and paid by the marshal in
good faith without notice not to pay the same,
and before the present comptroller issued his cir
cuar bearing date August 2Sth, 1851, the same
must be and the same are hereby directed TO be
allowed to the marshal, but suspended as TO the
district attorney. This question vas settled in
November Last in the case Of MIR. Bond, marshal
of Illinois, in passing upon his account numbered
l0I 2b4, and in the letter OF the Comptroller TO the
First Auditor, bearing date November 81, 1852.
The accounts of George A. Jones, late marshal of
Ohio, well as the accounts of the marsbals Of
the northern and southern Districts of New York,
and several others, have been settled on the same
principle.
ttss mer,it principle. Ii has been held by several
attorneys general that the law prior to the new fee
bill, does not require district attorneys to attend to
examinations OF criminals before judges, magis-
trates, or commissioners, and that such attendance
extra service; and it has been held by the
counting officers Tor many years as extra service,
and paid for accordingly, on the qmaraturn neut
principle generally at the rate of five dollafs per
day, but sometimes more Regarding IT as
extra service the law does make it the duty of
the judges to certify to such services, and when
they do certify the certificate cannot be treated
a udicial allowance Of the charge, but simply as
evidence of the rendition of the services aud of the
opinion of the judge of its value. The accounting
officers have exercised their own opinions OF toe
value OF such services and passed the accounts
cordingly. The charge of ten dollars for attend
ing each examination, in thesmost Of the cases,
seems reasonable, and may be alowed; but the
charge of s 900 in one appears very large,
and cannot be allowed unless on evidence, or
plantations showing the time occupied and the
great difficulty and importance Of the examina-
lion, that sum should be deemed reasonable. The
comptroller must exercise his Judgment in
such matters upon the facts and evidence pre-
sented, and cannot properly adopt the judgment
of others without other evidence substitute for
his own judgment. The same remarks apply TO
the charge Of 500 for attending examination
in another case. The charge of . 500 must be ex-
planned, as heretofore stated.
All the charges of the district attorney, Mr..
Hunton, for the prosecution of suits in the cir
cult and district courts of the United States, have
been made on the qudntum nler,tt principle, there
being fee bill in Louisiana prescribing the fees
OF attorneys. Mr. Attorney IeHerdl OTlVehueh
held, in the case of Durant, that such charges for
official services are not legal; and though allow
them to the marshal in this case, on account Of
their having been paid by him in good faith, and
in accordance with previous usage, cannot allow
them TO the attorney. AS to the attorney, they
must be suspended as Improperly paid, the mount
thereof charged to him, and be may state a new
account for those services, under and in accord
ance with paragraph in the new fee bill Of Feb
ruary %, 1858, which is follows:
In every case where a district attorney has
during the last six years, prosecuted or defended
a suit in which the United States was concerned,
in district where the law allows no taxable attor
ney fees, and for which he has received no
compensation except his per diem and annual sal
ary he shall be paid for his services according to
the provisions Of this act.''
In account No. l03, 467, three bills of John Gil
Ian, for services bell. ger and sweeper, were
suspended for explanation, TO wit:
lS49, May term district court, bill for 55 days
service. OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES. b l1U
lS49, April term circuit court, bill for II days
service. 80. $500. 49,. "a
lS49, December term district court, bill for So
days service. .................. llO
The alleg ed reason of the suspension 10, that
charges were m ade and allowed for crier and
three bailifs during the same period, and that the
7th section of the act of February 2S l799 does not
authorize the payment of person to sweep and
keep the court house clean in addition to the three
bailiff5 and crier.
The seventh section of the fee bill fI799 author
ICES the marshal to appoint such number OF per-
sons, not exceeding three. as the judges "shall
determine, TO attend upon the grand and other
jurors, and other necessary purposes" Each
court il authorized also TO appoint erier.
The same phraseology is used in the new fee
bill of February 26th, 1853, except that the court
may require the attendance of crier and five
baiifs, in the place of crier and three bailiffs
authorized by the fee bill of 1899. The same con
struction must be put upon the same words in
both statutes The words "othsr neeessary pur
poses" include bringing in and guarding prison
ers. seating bystanders, EaeDipg order in court,
&C., &C. II has been the custom IN many 81 fhs
districts and perhaps in nearly alt OF them, 10
EN- ploy man, other than the baids authorised by
the statute, to sweep the court house and keep it
clean, bring in fuel, and make trcs when neces
sarv, and do other mental aervjces, such as are
usually done by domestic servants Such ssrylces
are mostly rendered in the morning before the
court is opened and at evening after the court has
adjourned. No one would pretend that the law
requires tho bailiffs to take up and clean the car
pets and to clean the courtroom and jury rooms
before the commencement of a term or after it's
close; nor do believe that a fair construction Of
tho law requires the baifs to sweep the court and
jury rooms and keep them clean, bring in fuel,
and make fires during the terms of the court. The
practice which has obtained during long series