The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-08-06
THE MoNr0oHERYAD ADvERTIsHR


 MT. Rogers-The difference that this makes in report of the majority and minority is this: That it leaves the selection of the Clerk to the Judges of the Supreme Court. but his salary is fixed by law. Now 1 can see why the Clerk should be selected by the officers under whom he has to serve. In the first place, being under them, and be- ing selected by them. he would be more apt to give them better service than he would if he were independent of those judges, because he could very truthfully and rightfully say to them that you are not the judges of my &C., tion, and you must have me impeach- ed if you want to get rid of me. On the other hand, if he is selected by these officers. they can turn him out whenever he is falling in any partic- ular. There is another reason. The technical knowledge of the people of the State of Alabama at large. l do not believe Is sufficient to permit them to discriminate between persons who might be candidates for this place. The people of the State of Alabama gen. orally have not looked into this ques- ton of the clerkship of the Supreme Court, and the election of man to that position would depend upon his popularity alone. or his astuteness as a politician rather than upon his fit- ness. So much then for the question of election. It has been stated that during an experience of over fifty years. there has been but one Clerk of that Court who was selected by the Court who failed to give entire satis- faction. It seems to me that argu- ment is almost unanswerable. We nave had more than one Governor in fifty years. who failed by a great deal to give entire satisfaction to the people So you see the judgment of the people is not always infallible in the selec- tion of officers, indeed 1t is very falli- ble. This is not an argument against the elective system generally. It Is simply an argument against the elec- ton of this one particular person. whose duties are ministerial and who owes his duty to the Judges Of the Supreme Court.
 Now in regard to the question of the fee system. We have established the Supreme Court of the State. and every officer of that court except this clerk is upon a salary. Why leave one member of that body operating under a different rule? We'll, you say 1t Is because it has always been the custom for clerks of inferior courts to receive fees, and therefore you should not take out this one particular person and dis criminate against him.; It is not ois- crimination against hm. Let us sup pose for instance that the fees of the Clerk of the Supreme Court of the State of Alabama were less than one thousand dollars. Is there any man here that would say that the Clerk of that Court should receive only the fees? Why. no just person would De willing for a Clerk to serve for so It, tie money. They would come here and advocate his receiving three thousand or perhaps thirty-five hundred dol lars. and rightly so. The pay of an of- ficer should depend upon the service he renders. Therefore the argument that we should not discriminate against the Clerk of the Supreme Court by putting him on a salary. falls on its own weight. There has been q great deal said about the size or the salary. whether 1t shall be greater or less I submit this question, that the intense interest which the Clerk Of the Supreme Court takes in this matter. and nobody planes him for that. to have this system remain as 1t is at present instead of being changed, is answer enough to that proposition. believe he gets five thousand or six thousand. believe he gets it because he is unwilling to have his salary fixed. It is claimed he has to pay his assistants out of the salary he receives. but the very fact that he Is so interested in keeping this system like it is. is positive proof to anybody of sense that he does get more than a just salary.
 MT. Graham (Talladega)-Have you been able to get any information as to just how much he does get!
 MT. Rogers (Sumter)-No, sir. and I haven't wanted it. The friends of the Clerk have approached me here. and they are friends of mine--and l would not think a man much of a friend who did not stick to me-that Is perfectly legitimate. but then l do not permit any question of that sort. If know 1t, to influence me. Of course. it influences everybody to greater or lesser extent. but as a general propo- sition. I try to keep above personal in- fluences. If had the management or this thing myself. and it was g. mat ter of personal interest. perhaps l would be willing for 1t to go along as if is but I want the Clerk of the Su- preme Court put upon a salary. l want the fees of the Supreme Court reduced. reduced down to where 1t will not pay expenses, if possible. because we want to make the obtaining Of jus flee in Alabama as cheap as possible. Suppose I am sued. and feel that am uniustly sued, and l am brought De- fore the court, and have to proceed up to the Supreme Court. It IS unfair to have a large fee system rlxed upon me and maybe 1 may lose by some tech- nicality and have to pay these fees. In the giving of justice. we ought 10 reduce all fees to the very lowest linn if would be in favor of reducing inc foe system down to the very min inum. and of putting all of these of- ficers on salary. because. as said before. the men who are hrou,ht into court are not brou@ht there of their own free will they are placed there by other people, and because they some- times lose these cases it Is no reason why they should be mulcted.
 Mir. eatherly-Havent you just voted for Section "A, which provided for compensating Registrars in Chancery by fees?
 MT. WeatherlY-WhV not pay them salaries?
 Mir. Rogers-I have done so. and the reaeson l have is this: l do not know much about court system. hut l expect there would be sixtv-s six of these Regis ters in Alabama. there are sixtY-six counties. but anyhow l know that the cornpensa ton of these gentlemen taken upon the average would not more than pay them for their services. Now. If