Wilmington journal., 1875-07-23

OF Ignorant uoBIOeS TAiso tAoA Aaay
be poor, but that does not put them
upon an equality with negroes, either
mentally, morally, or socially. Ne
groes believe anything their Radical
masters tell them, no matter how glar-
ingly false. White men acknowledge
no masters, and require much more
than mere Radical authority to make
them believe Radical assertion.
(From the Charlotte Observer.
The Radical Party And Lawyers
Fees.
EDITORs OBSERVER
Among other charges made by the
Radical lncend aries in the campaign IN
! order to prejudice the popular mind
against Convention, is that 1T Is
scheme on the part of the Lawyers
of the Conservative party to increase
| the number and amount of their tax
| fees. Abuse of lawyers has long since
| come to be recognized by decent people
as the lamest and most vulgar of all
cant, and as being INDUCED in by those
whose past lives put them IN dread OF
that sort of organized scrutiny Ill which
lawyers" bear very important part.
Let us see now what the Radical Leg
islature of 1868 SO did in the same
matter of " lawyers fees" and then
what the Conservative Legislature of
1S7O-'7I did upon the same subj ect and
noHwhat the Conservative lawyers" did.
Under our old law the lawyers tax.
fees were as follows: Equity suits
twenty dollars; actions for land, ten
dollars; other actions four dollars; in
Supreme Court actions at law ten dol
lars. This is rather a short schedule,
and SO the Radical Legislature found
it. The Legislature fixed the fees as
[See Code of Civil Procedure, Sec
ton 297.
Iu case of judgment for want of
answer, $1,000
In case of judgment On appeal
from clerk, 500
In case of judgment upon issue
Of law Gf arguedD, 90
In case ofjudgment upon verdict
of Jury, 1900
On ever yorder of continuance, if
made afterwards, 500
In case where new trial is
granted, 10
For attendance in taking depo-
sition, 500
For drawing interrogatories, 800
For attending the examination of
party before trial, 800
For making and serving case up
on exceptions, 500
For procuring the appointment
of guardian, 2 90
Foc obtaining Injunction, 1000
For case in Supreme Court, 5000
In these cases the Supreme Court
could also award damages not exceed
ing ten per cent.
This would seem sufficiently liberal
to satisfy even Radical lawyer, but
the end is not. Section $50 proceeds !:
''In addition to these allowances there
shall be allowed to the plaintiff, on a
Judgment in any action for the parti-
ton of real property, for the foreclos-
ure of a mortgage. or in any action
in which q warrant of attachment has
been issued, or for an adjudication up
on will or other instrument in wri-
ting, and in proceeding to compel the
determination of claims to real proper
ty, the sum of fUe per cent. for any
amount not exceeding two hundred
dollars, and an additional sum of three
per cent. for any additional amount
not exceeding four hundred dollars,
aud an additional sum of two per cent.
for any additional amount not exceed
ing one thousand dollars"
It is true the Act calls these allow
| ance" costs" and ''indemnities for ex :
penses, but they were intended to be,
and seem, in fact, the taxed compen-
sa ion to lawyers.
Thus the law stood when the Radi-
calls went out of power. The first Con-
servative Legislature that came passed
an act repeating the act of 1868 go,
and provided that thereafter the tax
| fees should be as follows:
| l. In all cases in Supreme Court, SIS. 90
In all cases in Superior Court
where title to land comes in
question, $1,000
B. In all cases in Supreme Court
including special proceed
ings in Supreme and pro-
bate Courts, 400
See chapter 139, section 12.Laws of
1O7O-'71]
This bill originated in the Senate
was introduced by a lawyer, was re-
ferred to a committee of five LAWYERS
who reported, recommending it's passag
and upon the passage of the bill twelve
out of the thirteen Conservative law
yers then in the Senate voted for it.
OF those who voted against the bill
all but one were Radicals. OF the Radi-
Gals then in the Senate only four voted
for the Jilt, and of these four two we're
lawyers.
Now with what grace can the same
Radical lawmakers pretend that the
Conservative party, and specially the
lawyers, are not to I've trusted in the
matter of lawyers fees" The men
who burdened the people in every way
their practiced ingenuity could suggest
and plundered the State for four years.
regarding neither law nor public opin-
ion, will hardly be credited now when
they set themselves up as guardians of
people rights and champions of econ
omy in any department of the govern
ment.
Let me, in conclusion, tax you one
bill of costs under the Radical act of
1860
Suppose two men went to law about
Ia tract of land worth one thousand dol
lars, here in the bill of tax fees the
losing party would have to pay:
To Judgment on trial by jury, $500
f one continuance, 500
s. attending the taking of deposit
sitions. 500
" Making and hearing case on
exceptions. 500
IS per cent, on 5000, 1000 |
''3 per cent. on $4OO, 1900 |
per cent. on $4O0, 500
$4,000
If case went to Supreme Court, 5000 |
Total, $4,000 |
The tax-fees as authorized by act !
passed by Conservative lawyers would |
)e as follows
Cax-fees in Superior Court, $1,000
Supreme Court. 1900
Total, $500 |