, 1864-02-29

argumenls pn both sidea were voluuainous and
exhaustive. The Case was not closed at late
hour.
Bases & Towslee for plaintiff, and Walker d
Dexter for defendants.
A QUESTION or FHEs.-A case was decided in
the Cook County Court On Friday, By Judge Brad
we'll, which, though In itself small IL OF great In
terest IN its bear ngs On future aetions In that
court. 4 motion was made by E. F, Colby az ad-
ninistfator to seto the costs on a fec blu zcn~
dered BY the Clerk Of the Court. Judge Brsdwe1l
ordered the reduction Of the fees from $1s.lo to
$9.5s. md insisted that In future the Clerk shall
conne hts charges for fees to the strict letter Of
thest statutc The following appears to be the state
OF the case:
The fees charged were In accordance with the
Bco tn use during the last ten years; the present
Clerk charging no more than his predecessors in
Office. For the great majority Of items the stst-
utes provide fees, but not in al, and the custom
has boen where these are omitted, to take at the
same rate for given service aa fs allowed 1u other
cou1ts. This practice ia now eatopped. the fol-
lowing extract from the decision being authortta-
tiEe in the matter:
Cotts are not given by the common law, but de-
pend entirely upon the statutes and arc not to DO
Court. The officer taxing costs should always
chow the authority OF the Law, 70 exact Its par
ment BY the citizen. an Of the opinion that
contract with the people to dothe duties or the
Office for the ices prortded BY the statue; and
when he has done an official service, he mustlook
to the statute to find tho sum he to- receive for
that ecrvico. In support Of this principle refer
to tao f9noWing aathorit1cs; Spencer, IL; simp-
SSn H. stass e. oeogf o os leo 3o2 s1as x
L. R.. Al; smecd, 81; 2 6mecd, 100.
PROPERTY TTTLEs In the Superior Court
case has been on trial before Judge Gary, since
Tuesday last, which, though It involves no legal
point Of any particular interest to the profession,
msy, prove interesting to holders Of property ip
the city. An action was brought by Thomas P.
Wight %. Wa1lbaum ct a., tenants Of Ogden and
Robbins, for the possession Of the plaintiff share
OF $50 acres Of land, lying on both sides Of the
North Branch Of the Chicago River, where Og-
denis canal and several brick yard now arc. In
December, 1916, this property was sold at an ad-
inistrators sale, and on the 24th Of June follow
ing, was subsequently sold on m execution
against John F. Wight, deceased, the Judgment
having been rendered In his lifetime. J. 7. Scam
mon, the PLAINTIFF attorney In the execution, bid
OF the property at both sales, In behalf OF hia
client. He subsequently conveyed tho property
to VIM. 3. Ogden ard Allen Robbins. The plain
ti In this case-a son Of the late John F. Wight,
claims that tho Sheriff's and admins
| trator's deeds to Scammon were irresulnr
and illegal, md conveyed no title to
| the property. as against tho plaintiff and the
| other heirs OF the said John F. Wight, and tha.
therefore Ogden and Robbins have acquired nc
tile, and tue plaintiff sues to recover possession
ofhia share OF the property, It Ia also understood
that tho other heirs Of John F. Wight have also
instituted proceedings to recover the residue o1
verdict Of the mAjority-for the de!eadant-wae
accepted by the counsel Oh both tides.
raining this hall to grade was vittual1y dIssolged
| by desiBion Of Judge Williams In the Circuil
| Court on Saturday; the Court refusing TO issut
| attachment against Wesley Munger applied for b1
| Lazarus SilvermaD.
Plaintiffs attorneys Smith & Borden. Defend
ants attorneys Kales g. Williams and McCagg
| Fuller.