New-York tribune., 1873-02-15
EXPENSES OF THE UNITED STATES COUR'

EXPENSES Or HE INliED clAlLc OVN AAr'
INTERESTING COMPARISONS or THE COST IN
DIFFERENT sTATES-RECOMMENDAIIO OF
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL.
fFROM THE REGULAR CORRESPONDENT OP THE TRIBUNE
WASHINGTON. Feb. 13.-The annual report of
the recently 70 the Senate, con
taps tabular statement OF the expenses OF the United
states Courts for the year ending June co. 1879 From
this appears that the two Courts IN Arkansas cost
more than those in any other state There was sent TO
that state during the year FOR judicial purposes s
sl 75 while the three Courts in the State OF NewIOrk
cost the Government only $3.50 75 The United states
Court for the Western District OF Arkansas one OF the
most sparsey inhabited sections Of the whole country
uut s2ss $50 while the furnished TO the south
eru District Court of NeWYOrk only n14N o.. IN
exclamation Of this expenditure III the West
ern District OF Arkausas the Attorney General says:
large sum u expended annually for witnesses ices,
much larger than ought 20 suthoe' Dut am UnaDe
10 control it. practice has obtained ih many ~ lhe
districts OF summOnlng each term Of the court large
number Of witnesses many OF whom are frequently not
called 20 testify, and, IN many other instances tAeh
pOrance that does not Justify the expenses oecaoned
By their attendaace IAe senDn oi ~ IFe % eor5 Iu b
frequently been called to this abuse, but apparently
without the desired results This evidently the case
In the Western District of Arkansas. In that district the
advanced TO the marsha during The aSl hscal
year reached the large sum Of S24S0s very large pro
portion OF which was for witnesses fees.
other States in which the judicial expenses were very
heavy were Mississippi, sl48.O25 10 North Carolina
s1s4s6s 81 South Carolina sl7oSs7 - and Tennessee
Ss5a7 73 The expenses Of the United states Courts
IN PENNSYLVANIA s2l,715 49, and IN Ohio they we're
s95922 q. The courts Of Nevada cost only sG95 80.
In spenng the operations Of his department, the
Acknowledgement says:
The appOntment OF United states Commissioners Is by
law vested in the Judges of the Circuit Courts, 20 whom
alone tey are responsible knowing better than those
by whom they appointed 10 the proceedings OF
these Commissioners, I think 1t would be Wen II they
were made subject 20 removal upon recommendation by
the head Of this Department. Possibly this would tend
10 decrease the expenses the courts by esenng the
number OF preliminary examinations held before
commissioners These officers paid by fees, and Is
10 their interest have many examinations and
issue az large number Of suDpenas for witnesses a.
possible and frequently their warrants are Issued Oh
frivolous grounds thereby entang expenses upon the
Government without corresponding bene1t. III they
held their position subject 10 the control OF this Depart
meDf and liable 20 removal as before mentioned
they would probably De careful 10 the aecumu
ldtiOn OF expenses.
II should be remembered that thefures given in this
report do not the money sent 70 the Marshas
the Southern states, last summer as that Is included in
the expenses Of the current fiscal II was reported
that the Marshal North Carolina received nearly a
ouarter Of a million Of dollars during July, 1917.