The daily gazette. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1874-1883, 1883-10-19
A QUESTION OF COSTS.
QUEER FIGURING IN A JUS.
TicE's OFFICE.
A STRANGE SYSTEM OF CHARGES
Costs to the Extent Of Two Dollars I'm
posed with no Warrant or Commitment
and but One Witness.

In Esquire O'Neill's office, last evening,
was given an exhibition OF curious system
Of imposing costs, and one that the fee bill
OF Justices Of the Peace, as given in the Re-
vised Code of the State, fails to warrant or
explain.
The case was that of lad named Peter
Kelly, arrested by Officer Pierson for disor-
derly conduct at the corner of Fourth and
Monroe streets. The officer took the pris-
oner to the police station, and Immediately
thereafter escorted him 10 Esquire O'Neill's
Office, where he was given hearing.
The pollceman's testimony was that he
had received instructions 10 arrest all boys
found lettering around the corner OF Fourth
and Monroe streets, as the residents of the
neighborhood had complained of their dis
orderly antics. Last evening he came sud-
denly upon q crowd of boys on the corner
and arrested Kelly, who was the largest of
the number.
The Squire imposed fine of 50 cents and
the costs of the case.
Chow much is III" inquired the boys
father, who was present.
at will not be less than $2," replied the
Justice. "I'll throw of the f1ne and bring
1t down to that amount"
Mr.. Kelly then laid two silver dollars
upon the 'squire's desk.
"Here, officer, give these to the Chief"
said Esquire 0'Neill, and before leaving the
office Officer Plerson placed the money in
his pocket.
After the hearing the defendants father,
at the suggestion of some friends, returned
to the 'Squire's Office to ask for an itemized
bill of the costs. He did not get it. On
the contrary he returned smiling,
stating that the Squire had Informed him
that he had been very leniently dealt with,
and that had the full penalty been imposed
the amount would have been S3.27, or S2.77
without the fine.
According to the Revised Code of the
State, the fee bill of q Justice OF the Peace
In misdemeanor of this character would
be as follows:
For taking aud filing affidavit OF deposit
For i:sning 1arrant ~ or,o:t ~ co,,, 40
ment. ....,................... 20
For issuing first subpoena. is
For issuing second subpoena. 10
For entering Judgment. .................... 10
'''.''''s''''''''...''' w
Oihcer's fee. ......................... so
Total costs. 81 40
Now In this case there were no afIidavits
or dispositions, no warrant, no commitment,
and no subpoenas. The lad was arrested on
the street by the officer and taken directly
to the Magletrate's office for trial. The
costs, therefore, according to the Revised
Code, should have been as follows:
For entering judgment. ...................t. 10
Oincers lee.. .oO
Total. NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.. .0S
By rather strained construction of the
law, commitment is presumed to immedi-
ately follow conviction, and is charged &C
cordingly. Even this would make the total
amount but 80 cents.
And yet the defendant was required to
pay 81.
Under the provisions of the new city
charter the fee received by the officer should
be paid into the city treasury through the
clerk of the Municipal Court, but as this has
not been done in the past it is doubtful if it
will be done In this case.