The Manchester journal. [volume] (Manchester, Vt.) 1861-current, 1870-02-08

asi ,es- asl TAI % the grand l.si e.
l,g.lasa 5uhly q IS rents % az dol
- phxk fas~i 90 sam = $500 % .
lla nsw eaati Houee only. a. The .
.a,i rs oct fnjurtl ~ che Ere u vas
expected the aid falls cover the cI-
rerse. bat Isst fail usw tax ~ 20
cents on tbs dollar vas isiAto eom-
p5eie tbs handbag ard itis Sdd.tVeua'
sum = So .01a ISIS casesded nov vii
not sufsicss sna rsen - Fuo,i j1'lgmrtt'
ia that coaaly sas that over 100000
will De- uard up before the building I'
really f1r use Isl wtslom % expect
that oar ovu county Is 70 Be an eIc.p-
uon u ibis rule
wha, ATE se to Keep up double this
expense feri Let us see II ten
Year, We have sixty Jury trials IN
ci,! causes, "a average Of three Jury
causes term and Of six causes ia a
year.
Costs we're taxed in tweuiy-nine Of
these causes. as sppesr' by the rec
oras 10 the amount Of $3.50 90 max
ing an average q s65 90 on one side,
or $3.50 90. counting both sides the
same, Tie taxable costs ior oue year
would be $4,000. aud for sixty cases
in ten years would be $500. Sup
pose the cases tined by the court to
have equpled in taxable cost those by
Jury probably they would not be one
forth and YOU bare the sum Of sl56J
Tor one year, or sl5. 600 for ten years
Suppose one set Of buildings to cost u
only, say $4,000, what is the unnus
cost to the county Z Ten per cent OF
the cost would be low estimate iol
keeping the premises in repair and foi
interest Oh the money. .. t....
ou $4,000 this would he .,,,.. 5000 @
Insurance say .,.... .s.....t-- 900 W
Making an annual Expense ~ ...... $500 %
an amount more than double all th
, taxable cost on both sides q all the ca
ses entered IN court This sum must b
; pnid by the four thousand taxpayers il
( the county, when not one in hundrs
, of them attends court as suitor. Thi
must be paid in order to do the busj
Q uosg in one establishment My shout
: an increased erpcnse FIR t,eo be contu
!, ucd :
G Suppose that in one case in ten ia
parties or witnesses are so situate
( that it would be cheaper to try causc
' as now, than with one Court Hons
/ how much cheaper would it be? Ga
e you estimate The difference? The
Il must attend Court long enough TO II
e the case. Tho extra taxes Of the pa
II ties themselves in keeping up two q
% Adjustments would equal the extra e
IL pense Of a party who might accidental
IF Is be accommodated by trial nepy h
Il hon e. we're ne to be obliged once in
a lifetime to travel greater distance
TX j,
j telegruphs make this expence vel
Is small Baar in mind also the extra c
oense 10 taxable cost 10y the extra co
rs tinnanees under the present systel
iy The same reason for having two shir
u. in Bennington county exists in eve
in county III tha State, aud would give
g Court House to every toSn
is Let ~ lie just and even liberal
&? providing convenient place for
ca who are SO unfortunate as to hecor
ms parties IN court land all are liable
~ bel as well as for those Who do t
on business At the same time let rs
e. Just to ourselves and not assume lC
Of Of expense entirely disproportionate
be the business to be done, when
le- masses Of the people will not benefit
ro- bat only some individual or local pr
mt gratiied. Wherever it sbuil be Co
House should be upon the line of
railroad and not at such a distance
:. to compel people again to take tea
to get TO it. by voting to centre,
" low eitizeus, We shall relieve onrsel
'De and our posteri,y Of one-half d
'e' burden, which 10 any event is Quit,