Viewing page 125 of 243

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

Freedmen's Court,
Richmond, January 9. 1866.

Lieu't H. S. Merrell,
Superintendent Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen &c.

Sir,

In response to a communication of the 4. instant from James A. Bates, Captain and A.A.A.G, in reference to alleged exorbitant charges by this court for costs, which you have referred to me, I beg leave to make a true statement of the facts in regard to the matter.

At the organization of the court in October last, the judges composing the court adopted certain rules and regulations for their guidance, among which was one requiring parties bringing suits to make a deposit at the time according to the amount of the claim, the minimum deposit being fifty cents, and the maximum two dollars. A similar deposit is also required of the defendant on his appearance and making defence. These amounts have constituted the entire sum paid to the two civilian judges of the court; and when the difficulty and indeed in many cases impossibility of collecting any thing from the parties is considered, in connection with the further fact, that in no instance has any one been debarred access to the court because of his inability to pay costs or fees, it will be perceived how entirely inadequate to the labor performed has been the compensation paid to the judges before mentioned, and how unfounded is the charge of exorbitant costs, so far as these deposits are concerned. 

The court allowed the clerk to charge the same fees as were fixed by the late Court of Conciliation for similar services, which according to the custom of all courts, are recovered from the party in default. No suit is kept out of court where the party bringing it is unable to pay, and it is very rarely the case that the clerk's fees are paid unless the judgment is paid into court. Besides in perhaps one fourth of the cases brought, the matters are compromised out of court, and no one ever hears of either party afterwards. In many instances, I have collected merely a nominal fee, and in others have charged nothing, and I challenge contradiction of the fact that in no single instance has there ever been a higher charge than the court allowed.

I respectfully submit this statement

Transcription Notes:
---------- Reopened for Editing 2024-01-23 11:52:28 ---------- Reopened for Editing 2024-01-23 12:47:47