Evening star., 1938-07-30
DC. T0ASKSHAR
|NCOURT RECEIPTS
Plea to Congress to Seek
5000 of District Bench's,
1920 From Appeals.

early next session to permit the Dis |
tract to collect 60 per cent of the |
receipts of the District Court and
80 per cent of those of the Court of |
Appeals, the same basis on which the |
District now contributes to the costs !
of the courts, District officials an
nounced today.
This action is planned in a move
to free the District from Joker"
In the 1899 appropriation act, which
came to light late yesterday in ruling
by Acting Controller General r. N. |
Elliott, holding that the entire re-
ceipts of the court must be credited |
to the United States.
The District had contended that /
1t was entitled to portions of the fees
and fines on the same basis as 1t
contributes to the courts. The sum
involved for this year is estimated to
run slightly in excess of 100000.
Costs Now Divided.
Heretofore the entire costs of the |
two courts were borne by the Dis
trict. Last session Congress provided
for transfer of 40 per cent of the
per cent of the costs of the Court |
of Appeals to the Justice Depart
ment.
The size of the Joker" to the Dis
trict is increased by calculations made
by Mai. Daniel J. Donovan, auditor,
indicating that whereas the District
had anticipated a saving" of some
$250,00O as a result of the transfer,
the net result is an increase of $81 ,120
in costs to the District This is in
addition to the 100000 to be lost
under the accounting ruling if Con-
gress let's it stand.
Mr.. Elliott, holding that he was
bound by the wording of the acts in
question, declared that irrespective |
of the inequities which may result, |
this Office may not by construction
in effect nullify the apparent inten-
ton of Congress as expressed in the
statutes here in question
Reason for Increase.
The increase in costs of operation |
of the courts-instead of the ex-
pected saving-arose from two major |
factors. according to Mai Donovan's
brief. The first, he said. was that
Congress departed from recommended
tions by the Budget Bureau and |
added the costs of the United States |
marshal, the district attorneys office, |
special attorneys, the employees of the !
clerks office and the United States
commissioner-previo charged eX-
clusively to the United States. These
changes, he said added some S244,180 .
to the Districts share of the total bill. |
bill
The second he said, was the in
creases in court costs incident to the
provision for four additional judges.
In past years the District has been |
receiving the relatively small sum of
fees taken in by the clerk of the .
Court of Appeals. but none from the
clerk of the District court or the
marshal's Office.
Held Just Solution.
In propounding his question on
July IL Maj. Donovan said:
"It would seem to be fair and just, /
as the District is now going to be
required to pay so per centum of the |
cost of operating the Office of the
clerk of the District Court and the |
United States marshals Office for the
District, that it should be entitled to
so per centum of the fees arising |
from thes two Offices.
"If this arrangement could be ef-
fected it would mean credit to the
District revenue of about 100000
year. With reference to the ices
of the clerks Office of the United |
States Court of Appeals, the District
instead of being entitled to all OF
these on the aforementioned basis,
would receive only 80 per centum, or
slightly under $4,000, as against the
total fees of approximately $4,000"
Elliott Replies.
Mr.. Elliott in his reply said in part:
THE fact that the expense of these
Offices which was heretofore PAID
wholly from Department of Justice
appropriations are now required to
be borne in part by the District does
not warrant any change in the dis
position of the revenues which must, |
under the present laws. be deposited
wholly to the credit of the United
States
"It appears from your submission |
that the added burden on the Dis
trict appropriations is the result OF
action by the Congress in disregard
ing the recommendations of the Budg-
ct Bureau that the proportion OF the
expenses of the two courts to be borne |
by the District should be limited to
such expenses as were previously car
ried in the annual appropriation act
for the District"