Evening star., 1947-07-15
Two JuriistsA Ask
More U. 5. Aid
ForCourtsHere
Lows and Stephens
Mention Increase
In Federal Cases
By Harold B. ROGERS


By Harold B. Rogers
The increase in Federal cases be-
fore both District Court and the
Court of Appeals here justiies an
increase in the Federal payment to-
ward these tribunals, two jurists
told a House District subcommittee
today.
Chief Justice Bolitha J. Laws Of
District Court. and Associate Justice
Harold M. Stephens of the Court of
Appeals also told the House District
subcommittee on Home Rule and
reorganization that the present
system OF courts in this city should
not be disturbed by any kind of self
government set up by Congress.
The cost of both District Court
ana the Court of Appeals is divided
between the Federal and the District
Governments here, the jurists tes-
titled.
Separation Suggested.
Douglas w. McGregor, assistant
to the Attorney General, suggested
separation of local and Federal
cases in these two Federal courts in
the District.
Answering question from the
committee, he declared:
The possibility of the Federal Gov
ernment paying the entire costs of
the two United States courts here
was raised by Mr.. McGregor. He
thought this might be worthy of con-
sideration if all local cases were
taken out Of the Federal courts and
transferred to local courts.
In answering a committee oues-
tlon about the division of costs be-
tween the Federal Government and
the District, he referred to not only
the two courts, but also the Office
of the United States attorney and
the United States marshal here.
Basis Fixed in 1898.
Justice Laws said the division OF
costs had been fixed in 1898, based
on an estimated work load of the
two categories of cases. At that
time so per cent of the cost appor-
toned to the District government
and 40 per cent to the United States
as a fair division of the costs of the
District Court.
Il should say the percentages are
not unreasonable; but If I were to
make any change = the contri-
button of the United States should
be increased and that of the District
reduced" Justice Laws continued.
The increased work load, has
arisen because of cases growing out
of the war, he added.
Justice Stephens told the COM
mittee that United States courts in
some of the territories and possess
sions were supported completely by
Federal funds. He said 1t was a
question for Congress to determine
the division of costs here.
He said, however, taking into
consideration that Federal cases
consume much more time than local
ones and that many of the cases in
the District Court are cases which
in the States might be removed to
Federal jurisdiction, I am of the
view that something in excess of 40
per cent of the work of the District
Court is Federal and something less
than go per cent local.
Increasing Load Stressed.
Justice Stephens said that the 1898
basis of splitting costs for the Court
of Appeals assessed 10 per cent to
the Federal Government and 80 per
cent to the District of Columbia.
The amount of business in his court,
he told the committee, had increased
in both burden and extent He
stressed the increasing load of Fed
eral cases due to the fact that this
is the seat of Government and much
litigation comes here by necessity
on a national basis.
Both Justice Stephens and Justice
Laws strongly opposed changing the
present system of courts here. They
objected to increasing the jurisdic-
ton of Municipal Court and asked
the committee to recommend no SUBJ
stantial alterations in the tribunals
as part of any recommendation to.
Congress.
On the other hand, Chief Judge
George P. Barse of Municipal Court
told the committee that II have an
entirely different approach from the
Others"
If the committee intends to estab-
lish home rule in Washington,
Judge Barse told the committee,
there should be a Municipal Court
and local Superior Court.
He disagreed with Justice Laws
contention that there would be great
difficulty in trying to decide whether
a case was Federal or local, if a new
system of home rule local courts
were set up.
II see no difficulty" Judge Barse
said, 'in determining for instance
what Is a local criminal offense.'
Judge Barse proved that the
court of superior jurisdiction ham
ding local matters. both civil and
criminal, should take care Of cases
not delegated to the Municipal
Court.