Fayette County herald. [volume] (Washington [Washington Court House], Fayette County, O. [Ohio]) 1860-1???, 1879-02-20
Omcia1 stoa1inr

Omcia1 Stealing.
There seems to be a prevailing mania,
n some sections of our State, among
bounty officials. to add to their wealth by
taxing up costs in cases where official /
services have been rendered in excess of
what the law allows them for their ser
vices. The single case of this kind of Of /
fetal stealing in our own county is notan
exception to oti1ereounties, and the habit
is becoming so common that it is really
alarming, and oppressive upon class of
persons who have been unfortunate in
their business relations; and public Off
GERS who have adopted this mode of fleh-
ing money out Of the pockets Of unfortn-
nate litigants ought to be punished tothe
extent of the law in such cases.
The Newark Clicking county, cores
pondent of the COLUMBUS Dispatch, gives
an account Ofithe erookedness of the
Clerk of Licking county, which fell like
an electric shock upon the unsuspeeting
Taxpayers of that county when the ex-
posure came to their knowledge, through
the columns of the Dispatch. Mr.. Wells,
the county clerk, has always been re-
garded as an honest man and a faithful
and true public officer. In the Dispatch
Of the I4th we fnd the following expos
ure, of the manner in which the Clerk
has been committing official thefts:
ssGot even the slightest rumor of any
icrOOkednessi had reached the. ear of the
public until last nights exposure. Those
who had suspicious of crookedness were
the attorneys whose clients he had over
teharged, and1tl attorneys dare not open
their mouths against man with whom
they had to transact business daily. a
The conversation in fhe stores, saloons
and, hotels was on Wells 'doihgs. From
many he. received sympathy,i on account
4 of bis familYs but the majority were in
Il favor of having Justice meted out to the
man who had not only violated the faitl
Of the people who elected him, but the
1t is known with certainty that Wells
-tavercharges on fees on the late election
Feturns We're enormous. This matter has
| not yet been fully inVestaged, but on one
2 account of election returns from a seer
tain township; Wells had the fees for him
d Eseif put down at 50. when it has proved
by figurffig I1I5.i the legal amount to b,
only s. 30, makfng over $40 0Vefcharge.
= | on one single township. just how mGeI
! the oYeFeharging. Will amount. to wheI
B all The townships are heard from remain
!. TO be iseeii... tn s's'liss
Alprominent lawyer called on the Dis
: patch reporter tO-day;l and stated that a
. ne (the repoEter) had opePsd up this mat
m ter, ne would furnish him case where M
! client had been charged on the cost. bill
, | ItWenty-eight times the amount all0wei
fiDy laWsf slgsF nfFstR II 3sisi gaB Hiffsa} 500 !
J4iai Mr. j. M,. SYartz,, another preminen
lawyer, had clients cost bill presente
to hfifi.1 Swartz thodght the matter ha
e been q little sOVer+llone, so he figured u
4 pthe actual cost allowed by law, and upo
presenting AZ to ellis il was reduced 8
ii per cent.
AinGmber Of cases have been given
> your reporter with the understantlin
that no names.shall be mentioned, hut th
& lparties stand ready to- substantiate "a
r / statements made. One party was charge
= $500 for complete record of a certai
s case z0p counting the words the con
.Iplete record according to legal charges
e would foot up, $2.4Q, ,,f,.is f..ss..4st.Es
X ATotfer party was charged 81 .15 for
conaplete record ana the law only ALLOW
SO cents for the work. 81 aal' ael asst;
! It is. safe to-state that there;is not an "a
torney in the city but who has had tt
Is cost bills Of his clients subjected to ill
1t gal charges. q Your reporter has take
e. pains to call upon a number of t1leileg
1, fraternity, and they all claim to have bee
= overcharged at some time or other. i.
sr Another case before closing-being &
be foreclosure Of mortgage, in which Il
NJ amount in the case was about $44. II
costs in this case were over $47. 1t ws
= however, considerably reduced when
4 9kicl'' was made.
- Yesterday the County COMMISSIONS
ID passed on cost bill in criminal cas-
It, made out by the Clerk. The, cost b
is liamounted to $429 which was presented
Il that body about a month ago. In Il
~ ComRlissionerslO looking over this bill TIL
d, had the Auditor look up certain case
ne see how many words had been lreeorde
s5s The Auditor found that out of Z, 100 wOr
/ & charged that only 964 had been recorde
In this bill of 1929 the Commissions
found enough over-charges to cut the
or to 5000, making 1929 overcharges.
tic The bill previous to this, on costs
MS criminal cases, amounted to over $S
,w The commissioners thought it an EN-
=. nous cost bill, and employed Hon. CT
az son Atherton to look up the the affair a
lis seeif there was not some Over-chargi
/ a done. Atherton found there was ovi
ad charges to, the amount of nearly So
which was knocked off of this bill as
ing Illegal