The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1855-07-20


We have noticed some suggestions concerning the e1-
penses Of prosecuting before the Court Of Clams
founded upon the superstition that they would necessarily
be very great Upon inquiry learn that these
tons are founded upon misconcepon to what these
expenses necessarily are and what proportion they bear
to those Of other high courts There is court of SO
high grade where the expenses less nor one where
the facilities for speedily ending greater The
practice prescribed by the statute and the rules OF the
court is Of the most simple and convenient character If the
claimant fails Of he is subjected to be mucied
in the amount Of his adyersarys costs, compelled to
pay the court or its clerk heavy bills of fees The only
expense to which the petitioner be subjected is that
Of his counsel the fees of commissioners for taking his
testimony his witnesses fees and the charges printing
his papers These charges not greater than in other
courts which clerks and other officers are authorized to
demand in addition large amounts for fees The great
charge in all courts is the fees for counsel which are
usually matters Of agreement with the client In the
Court of Claims there good reason why they should
be higher than in other courts ought they TO be as
high understood agents before Congress have usual
" charged The practice Of the court is arranged that
claimants may employ counsel in their own vicinity TO
their case take the testimony and prepare for
argument They may then either send printed argu-
ment or employ such counsel argue it orally as they
choose Able counsel be employed here readily,
and for as low compensation, as in other cities.
There is no good reason for their demanding
parties choose to employ them, and make their com
pensation contingent upon success, and thus provide
for others large If undue share OF what may be
awarded them it is matter of their Such share il
unduy large cannot be deemed necessary expense but
voluntary one We have heard it intimated that IN
cases where the court determines in favor of the claimant
he still may be compelled employ agents to urge his
claim before Congress We apprehend that this is not So
The law requires the court in such cases to prepare ana
report bills for the action of Congress- carry ont such
determination. There can be but little doubt that Con-
gress will manifest its confidence in the court 10y making
such appropriations may be necessary If So the real
necessary expenses of prosecuting claim before the court
and obtaining payment will be limt and even fall be-
low those in other courts and especially those where
view There is no claim so small If legal which may mol
be prosecuted this when it would be worth suing
for in my other In reply to the suggestion that the fees
of commissioners fixed by the court too high
would remark that il this shall be found in practice
have no doubt that the viii reduce them to the
proper standard. Certainly they have no inducement
to overreward these officers unnecessarily tax suors
We have deemed it due alike TO the court and claimants to
say this much in reply the suggestions to which have
referred.