New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-11-14
KELSEY MUST PAY 1T BACK
SUPREME COURT DECIDES HE HAD
no RIGHT TO $4,000 PRE-
ROGATIyE FEES.

Trenton ~ 7 Nov IA CspeciaD-chlef Justice
Magic. OF the Supreme Court. handed down an
opinion to-day In the case OF the STATE against
ex-Secretary OF State Henry c. Kelsey, unoer
which. II this decision ~ not reversed ny INC
Court of Errors and Appeals. Kelsey will have 10
put into the State Treasury a sum close to VOW.
AS Secretary OF State he also Register OF the
Prerogative Court. Between october l, lsS ana
April /. 1897 he collected fees for official services
as Register and retained them for his own use.
These fees amounted TO s9,74s 81. and the court
says now that the State Is entitled 10 the money
date.
The famous State House investigation OF lSo,
made by special committee Of the senate. OF
which Governor VOORHEES, was chairman oIougn.
OF State. was collecting and keeping certain ices
which Il held he had no right 70 pocket; ana me
Legislature recommended a suit against Kelsey
for the recovery OF the money and A69rney cen,
eral Grey began IT, The argument TOOK pace ,S at
the last June term Of the Court r. y LlnaanuIy
exJsdge william T I'M Lagnng and other attorneys
Chief Justice Magic, in to-days opinion. quotes
Secretary Of State acting in whatsoever Official
capacity. shall be entitled 10 no compensation other
these acts says the Chief Justice. the Legis-
Secretary Of State for official service In his various
offices by fees and substituted the system OF COM
Clerical sssisants but The fees posed by law
upon suitors and others employing the services OF
for the benefit OF the State II Is obvious that u
this legislation remains unrepealed and unmodined
the State of New-Jersey Is entitled 10 recover from
the defendant the fees in question
Mr.. keisey's counsel contended that N had oeen
modified by an. act passed April IS 1891 which de-
fined the duties OF the Register OF the Prerogauve
Court and entitled him to charge and receive the
same fees allowed by law 10 the Surro-
gates OF the several counties OF the State for Ike
services. provided that all expenses incurred IN
carrying out the provisions OF this act should ns
paid by the Register out OF the fees collected
The question before the Court. says the Chlef
Justice. must be solved by determination or the
legislative intent expressed in this act Its pur-
poses. says the Court. perfectly plain ana
unmistakable. and he CONSTITUTES II as authorizing
the reception OF such fees by the Register but for
the use Of the State and TO be accounted Tor 10 H.
The construction contended for In behalf OF Mr..
Kelsey attributes TO the act In question an intent
10 abrogate the law which gave him a salary In
stead OF fees for compensation. The Chief Justice
holds that such construction Is not Justlhapie
from the reading OF the act.
In conclusion. Chief Justice Magic says: 1T IL
not improper TO add that, since the passage OF the
act OF March 30 1883. fixing the compensation OF
the Chancellor and the justices OF this court, ana
prohibiting them from receiving any Tees, various
acts have been passed giving 10 those officers IN
language similar TO the language OF the act IN
question certain fees for official services requested
OF them Upon the construction contended for IN
this these officers would have been Jusllned
in receiving and retaining these fees in addition
10 the compensation provided by that act but
no such construction has ever been given 70 those
acts The result is that the State is entitled 10
recover. , -, 80.
From the pleadlngs and stipulations OF facts
there is nothing TO show what defendant had eN-
pended out OF the fees admitted 10 nave peeE re-
ceved BY him in carrying out the provisions OF the
act in question. The recovery must therefore De TOT
the whole amount received with proper interest.
writ OF error will be taken 10 carry the case
to the Court OF Errors and Appeals