The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1877-05-10
Clerks Fees I'm bankruptcy Cases.

Editors OF the Dispatch: The following
paragraph from the Fredericksburg Star
was copied Il few days ago into your pa
per:
GAN EXPLANATION WANTED.-Some OF our
Deoplc who were discharged from bank
ruptcy nine or ten years ago are in receipt
of printed letters signed by the clerk OF the
United States District Court at Richmond,
demanding an additional amount OF S5.2j
clerks fees, according to some decision OF
Judge Hughes, and enclosing printed
statement OF account. The only writing in
the correspondence ls the signature OF the
clerk. AS the gentlemen receiving these
duns were discharged before Judge Hughes
and the present clerk were in official exist
ence, and as the discharges could not be
granted until all fees and costs were paid,
and as the clerk claims these fees as Gov
ernment officer, and yet states that he has
reduced the amount nearly one half, the
bills are received with some incredullty and
amazement.'
An explanation Of the above is easy. The
records in some of the cases in bankruptcy
which have been filed in this judicial district
show certain fees still due to the clerks
office: such thing is not unusual with
clerks offices in general and it is not known
Ting obligations OF the sort than other suit
ors. In several Of such cases statement OF
the clerks account has been sent to the per-
sons concerned. No steps have been taken,
however, as yet, to enforce payment; but
the matter has been submitted solely to the
honesty Of the person addressed. A change
of clerks does not cancel fee due the
clerks office, in which the Government has
contingent interest. For several years
there was diversity of opinion among
LAWYERS and among the officers OF the
District Court as to what were the true
amounts of the fees allowed by law to the
officers, the laws being somewhat conflict
inc and ambiguous. About two years ago,
in O case which came from Bedford county,
the Judge of the court (Judge Hughes),
after hearing argument from Major James
O. Hensley, attorney Of the bankrupt, took
pains to 90 carefully over the whole subject
and to construe the law as to each item OF
the fees allowed respectively to register and
to clerk. In that case the bill OF j. F..
Cobbs, formerly register, which had been
examined and allowed by Edward j. Cn-
derwood, the then clerk, at S65.35, was re-
duced by Judge Hughes to $37.S5. Thus
was q reduction OF almost one half; and in
the same case the balance claimed by the
clerk. of Sl5.40, was reduced to Sl0.S0, or
about one third of the whole. After this
decision a standing general order OK court
was made fixing the amounts so ascertalned
as the fees due to the officers.
On the basis OF this general order the &C
counts of the clerk recently sent out have
been made Oft, and this has been done with
out any knowledge OF the fact on the part
OF the Judge. When the clerk proposes to
collect d fee due his office he does not trouble
the Judge about it. His fees are directed
by law and regulated only by Judicial con-
struction As the bankruptcy law did not
20 into operation until July, 1867, OF course
these fees cannot be rs old as ten years. AS
the law expressly forbids q discharge in
bankruptcy to be withheld for the non
payment OF fees, and orders it to be issued
when due though fees be not paid, OF course
the fact that a discharge has been granted
does not afford even an inference that the
fees haye been paid. A discharge in bank
ruptcy is a discharge only from the. debts
due to creditors provable in bankruptcy; il
is not a discharge Of the bankrupt from
fees due to the clerks office for services
rendered him. The bankrupt does not
necessarily see the clerk in the course OF
the bankruptcy proceedings; and it there
fore happens in many cases that the clerk
has no opportunity. to collect the fees due
his Office, and receives only his proportion
Of the original deposit-fee required to be
made by law at the beginning of each case.
During the years when the number OF cases
filed were very numerous these clerks
quotas Of the deposit-fees more than made
up the maximum compensation allowed
him by law, and the then clerk could well
afford to neglect the collection Of the after
accruing fees allowed by law, and did neg
lect them in many cases. The result in con-
siderable number OF cases is that these fees
are still due the office, and the persons IN
debted have been asked to pay. THIS is All.
Very respectfully,
JOHN r. PoPHAM, Clerk, &c.