The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1916-12-29
NO RIGHT TO CHARGE
FEES FOR SERVICES
CLERKS Not Permitted Pay in Game or
Prohibition Law Regfstra-
tons.

state Auditor c. Lee Moore yesterday
notified all of the court clerks In the
State that they are not entitled under
the game and prohibition laws of vir-
ginia to receive fees for issuing hunt
ing licenses or for filing prescriptions
and affidavits of transportation COM
panies and druggists. Assistant At
torney-General Leslie C. Garnett has
rendered Mr.. Moore opinions on this
question, which have also been sent
to the court clerks.
1t Is understood that the druppists
of Norfolk. and other cities, were pre-
pairing to fight the question in the
courts. but the communications of the
state auditor will cause the clerks
to discontinue their practice of charg-
ing fees The opinions of the assis-
tant attorney general are as follows.
both Of which having been made to
! the auditor:
l acknowledge your letter enclosing
communication from Mr.. Harry Bur-
nett. clerk of Augusta County. In the
following terms:
Il have been informed that a num-
Der OF tho county clerks have been
charging fee Of as cents for issuing
hunting license. I can find no law for
II this charge Is correct"
and asking the opinion of the attor-
ney-general thereon.
section rs OF the game law. chapter
lbz OF the Acts Of 1915. page 267 2s2.
provides that the clerk shall retain S
per cent OF the money received for each
hunting license issued by him, and
shall pay the balance to the State
treasurer on tho hrst day Of each
month Inasmuch as this section
makes a specific allowance to the clerk.
am of the opinion that he can only
claim the amount allowed by the game
law. and cannot claim the provisions
of section 1905 OF the code. which 10
the general statute covering his fees.
The following opinion was rendered
regarding the collection of fees under
the Mapp law:
Acknowledgment 10 made of your
letter of December Is. making inquiry
as to whether or not under the prohi-
bition law the clerks of the courts can
charge a fee FOR each affidavit filed
with them. as required under the pro-
hihition act OF transportation compa-
MES and druggists.
I beg to enclose you in this regard
a copy Of q letter written the prohi-
htion commissioner by the attorney
ton that while II may be reasonably
held that the clerk OF the court is en-
titled 10 IS cents tunder section 1905 of
the code) for issuing soft drink licen-
ses under the order of the court, II Is
doubtful whether or not the clerks are
entitled to fees for fling the anidavits
aforementioned. The question did not
come within the Jurisdiction Of the
prohibition commissioner. and there
fore. the attoruey-general declined TO
pass upon II.
In your letter you call attention to
the fact that the clerks of the courts
are required to pay into the treasury
fees and allow ances in excess of the
amounts prescribed by law for the
clerks to receive. and that. therefore
this matter becomes a question within
your jurisdiction and one upon which
you desire the advice OF the attorney
general
There IL no provision in the prohi-
hition law permitting the clerks to
charge fees for fling these affidavits.
and we will, therefore have TO look
to the provisions of section 1905 of
the code as amended.
1t is not clear from this section that
the clerk Is entitled to any fee for
receiving and Ming tfllng makes these
papers matter of record. OF course).
and. therefore, while I do not think
that my opinion carries any convic-
tion with II IN the premises shall
have to hold that in the absence OF a
clear provision OF the statute. the
clerks are not entitled to receive any
fee for fling these prescriptions and
affidavits,