392':
FEDERAL REPORTER,
vol. 42.
were, .therefore, in faetand law, the·.first owners of the note, and the immediate parties on one side to the transact.ion, just as the plaintiff in which he here would be if there had been but a. single had advanced to the defendant directly a sum of money in consideration for the giving of the note in suit. But this case is different. The Portland Savings Bank ,gave value for the note, and. held it as owner, and receiv.ed payments upon it; and, if it had sued upon it without filling the blank, no objection to the action could have been successfully urged upon 'the ground that there was no privity between it and the defendant. The authorities all agree that a person who receives {i'om'the maker of a note payable to " or bearer," and who is bona fide owner and holder, can maintain a suit upon it without filling the blank. 1 Rand. Com;'Piiper, 254. Upon principle, the rights of a primary holder of a note:po.ya,ble "to the order of ," should be measured by the 'same rule. Such a note, in the hands of a bona fide holder, is Ii valid contract' for the,: payment of money; and a bonafide purchaser acquires a complete title: .by the mere delivery of it into his possession. It is, in legal effect, a note payable tobea'rer. 1 Daniel, Neg. Inst. § 145; 1 Rand. Com. Pap'er, 253, 290; Rich v. Starbuck, 51 Ind. 87; Brummel v. Enders, 18 Grat. Oruchley v. Olarance, 2 Mimle& S. 90. 'fhis note was once delivered to and held by the Portland Savings Bank, a.nd ;the obligation created by it has been partially met by paymentsof interest to the bank. It has been transferred and retransferred. The plaintifHs·a "subsequent holder" of it in fact. There has been no transaction between him al1d the defendant directly. On the contrary, all his rights as against the defendant were' acquired by a contract of purchase between him and another person, who, so far as the reoord discloses the facts, is an entire stranger to this action. If there had been no assignment or transfer of this note, h would still be helrl by the Portland Savings Bank, and no action upon it could· be prosecuted in this court. Therefore, by the terms of the act of congress above cited, the present action i!3 likewise barred in this court, and must be dismissed.
, GOODRICH"
(,Jerk, etc.,
f1. UNITED STATES.
(DtBtrict court, E. D· .Arkansas, W. D.March8, 1890.) 'Under the provision in the deflciency appropriation bill of Augnst4, 1886, (24 St. at J;.arge, 274,) denying docket lees to commissioners, such docket fees cannot be al· . lowedr1l'ollowing Craw/ora v. U. S., 40 Fed. Rep. 446It SAME;,..AoxOwLEDGMENTS TO · .,Rev. liIt'V. S; § 847, whioh allows commlssioners.25 cents for "taking an Ii.oknowl· .edgillent, "applies to acknowledgments to ,recognizances. ·Following McKinst1'/l , U; S., 40 Fed. Rep. 818. . .
i' 'UNITED ,
STATES' COMMISSIONERS-COMPENSATION-DoOKET FEES.
8'.
SAME....o.SmM:NA8.
.
TiI-!l{)llmmWSiof/.er m8!y oharge for issuing two subptenasln the sameoase. where the witnesses resilla in opPo.site and. lI,ave to be subptenaed 'by diffe.rent v. tr. is. I 89'Fed;' Rep. 410; , ' .. J '. . , ! . ' .
GOODRICH V. UNITED STATER. " S.lMJi:-WARRANTS.
393
He may also charge for issuing several warrants in a case where there are several defendants. . Where a defendant is brought before a commissioner, and upon hearing the. COm' plaint read waives examination and gives bond, such proceedings constitute a hearlUg for which the commissioner is entitled to fees. : .' ...
5. BAME-HE.UtING.
Under Rev. St. U. S. § 847, which allows commissioners "for issning auy warrant or writ and for any other service the same compensation as is allowed to clerks for like services," a commissioner is entitled to fees for drawing recognizances aud complll.ints.. and entering returns on writs in criminal cases. Following Band v. U. S.,36 Fed. Rep. 671. . 7. CLERI'. Oil' COURT-COMPENSATION nt 'CRIMINAL CASES. . ... The' clerk's fees for entering orders approving accounts of commissioners and. the district attorney, for entering report of money paid into court and filing vouchers pursuant> to a standing order of the court and Rev. St. U. S.5 7g8, for'malking transClipts required by 24 St. at p. 507, § 10, when ordered by the ney, and for entering an order appomting an attorney to defend a poor person, are all chargel!oble to th.e United States. . ' 8. SAME-ATTACHMENT FOR .CONTEMPT. · ,. An attachment against a witness for contempt, in not a subpaltla; 1&," criminal proceeding, in which the United States is plaintilf, and the cost'of the proceedi:ng, including a docket' fee, is chargeable to the United l:)tates. Following Erwin U. S., S7 Fed. Rep. 470. " . .-9. SAME-DEPUTY AS JURY COMMISSIONER. Where a deputy-clerk ac.te with the jury commissioner in drawinA' juries wbile the c!>lUrt is not in session, he is entitled to the same compensation allowed, the commissioner for like services, where sucb compensation is shown to be'll. reasonable charge,for the work performed. FolloWing Erwin v. U. S., 87 Fed. Rep. 470. .' , 10;
6.
SAME-DRAWING RECOGNIZANOES-RETURNS.
A clerk who is also a commissioner may charge a per diem for his attendance at court, and a per d!emfor hearing a cause as commissioner on the same day. ]'ollowing Erwin v. U. S.,llr Fed. Rep. 470. SAME-DISTRICT AND CIRCUIT COURTs-TRANeFER.
AND COMMISSIONER-PER DIEM.
r
11.
12.
WRITS-WARRANT OF COMMITMENT-SEAL.
The warrant of commitment of a defendant under final judgment should be under the seal of the court. Following Van Duzee v. U. 8.,41 Fed. Rep. 571. '
At Law. U.M. « G. B. Rose, for plaintiff. Charles a. Waters, for defendant. CALDWELL, J. This is a suit brought by the plaintiff to recover fees alleged to be due himns clerk of the .circuit and district courts, and 'as commissioner of the circuit court, which fees have been disallowed by · the comptroller. There is no contention about the facts. The services charged for were performed. The only question is the legal right of the plaintiff to recover for the services. a>mmiBSioner's Fees. The charge of the plaintiff for docket fees, as commissioner, must be disallowed. The act allowing that fee has been r&pealed. 24 U. S. St. 274; McKinstry v. U. S., 40 Fed. Rep. 813; Calvert v. U,S' 1 37 :;'i'ed. Rep. 762; Crawford v. U. S., 40 Fed. Rep. 446. Contra: ·McDermott v. U. S., rd. 217; PhiUips v. U. S., 33 Fed. Rep. 164; Bell v. U. S., 35 Fed. Rep. 889; Rand v. U. S., 36 Fed. Rep. 671; Hoynev. U. S., 38 Fed. Rep. 542.
REPORTER,
A commissioner is entitled to 25 cents for each recognizance. McKin&try v. U.' S., 40 Fed. tte'p. 813; Heyward v. U. S., 37 Fed. Rep. 764. Contra: Crawford v. U. S., 40 Fed. Rep. 446; Barber v.Y. S., 35 Fed. 1tepi: Rep'; . He is entitled to charge for two sUbprenas in the same case if they necessary. Tl;1i lS , charge was disallowed by the comptroller on· the ,ground. that the names of, all the witnesses should have been included in I but iSisometimes impracticable.. It not unfrequently occurs,as it did in this 'case, that witnesses reside in opposite dlrections, have to be sUbpmnaed'by"differelltof!icers. Jones v. U; S., 39 Fed· . 0 ". .. ' '. . . "The feesohal'ged for issuing more than one warrant,' where there were de,fel').dants,sw:nd,oIlthe,same footing, and are A defendant was brought before the commissionerrthe complaint read, . Pefendant waive<i examinat,ion, 'and entered into'bond to answer. 'T1;le'coniptrollerdisallowed a per diem in the case, on the ground that no wittlesswas sworn, and that there was therefore no But there was a hearing and trial of the case that disposed of it·.. The commissioner's '(Jourtwas open, the defendant was arrlligned, and such proceedings were was bourido.ver. , This wass.'" hearing and df;lCiding on" a. criminal charge, for·whieh, thestatnteallows the commissioner five dolrecognizat),ce complainf,s,and entering J;'eturns on wlatsm orimlllal cases, are legitimate charges. Rand v. U. S., 38 Fed. Rep. 666; Oratojord v. U. S.., 40 Fed. Rep. 446; Rand v. Fe4.Rep. 671jJ011es v. U. S., 39 Fed. Rep. 410. The commitmentscharged for 'Were not "temporary," but ,werejn cases where the defendants were held to answer, anclwe,re committed for want of bail· ..Olerk's Fees. The fees fOT:entering orders, approving accounts of commissionerS'and district attOl'ney; are properly chargeable to the United States. Rand v. U. S., supra; Jones v. S., 39 Fed. Rep. 410; Commissioners' Oath Fee Oase, 5 Lawr. Dec. 350j Erwin v. U.S., 37 Fed. Rep. 470. The charge for entering report of' money paid into court; and filing vouchers, is proper. This service was performed in pursuance of a ·'st.anding'ordEir of tne' couHand section 798, Rev. St. U. S. Goodrich v. ·m BJ> .35 Fed.- Rep. 193'j"Jones v. U. S.,39Fed.Rep; 410. The fees for, making transcripts required by section 10 of the act ap·'proiV.ed March .3, 1887" (24 U. S. St. 507,) when ordered by the district ·att()mey;are char-geable to the United States. In r6 (Jlerk's Oharges,5 Fed. Rep. 440. ,,,The warrant of commitment of a defendant under thefinaljudgment and sentence ofthe court should be under the seal of the .court. Van .. Rep. 571. ' . of tJhisoourt inequired to appoint a deputy for the court at :I'e:tarlutnal The deputy/at that pIace'acts with the jury commissioner im drall'mgJui'ies. ' .;Filr·thattservioe he has charged five'dollars a,day for three days, the exact sum allowed the jury:. commissioner for like sei'v-
11. FI$CUB.
395
ices, and, which is shown to be a reasonable charge for the work performed. A similar charge has been allowed by the pr.esent comptroller. and I think rightly so. I can see no reason for requiring the 'deputyclerk to perform this service for nothing. The court was not in sessi<lD. and he drew no per diem while performing the service. ErwiJnv. .· 37 Fed. Rep, 470. . The clerk is entitled to his mileage for attending court at Texa:rkaha. Section 828, Rev. S t . ' '. . , The fee for entering order appointing attorney to defend a poorprisoner is chargeable to the United States. Attachment against a witness for contempt of court, in not obeying a subprena, is a criminal proceeding. in which the United States is plaintift, and the costs of the proceeding, including a docket fee. is chargeable to the United States. E,'win v. U. S., 37 Fed. Rep.. 470. A clerk, who is also a commissioner, may charge a per diem for his attendance on court, and a per diem for hearing a cause as commissioner on the same day. Erwin v. U. S·., 8upra. In the settlement of plaintiff's Rccounts for the year 1887, the comptroller trans/erred from the district court account to the circuit court sc-· count' the· SUlp of $535 in fees, which were earned in the dib1.rict court. The result of this was to raise the clerk's account in the circuit court beyond th.e linlit allowed bylaw, and it was done for that purpose. For the expense acsame purpose the comptroller ,deducted from the count in the circuit court the sum of.$156. thus bringing the plaintiff in debt to the United States on his circuit court account in the sum:Qf.. $645. 20. By this method of stating the account, the plaintiffw8s wfQngfully deprived of $535 on his district court ilccounts, after satisfying . aU excess ofemQlmnent earned in the circuit .court. That this could nQt: be rightfully done has been decided. Goodrich v. U. S·· 35 Fed. lWp. 193; Butlfrv. U. S., 23 Ct. Cl. 162. Applying these principles to the accounts sued on, I find there is due fro\ll the United States the sum of $788.15.
UN.1TED STATES
ezrel.
SILYERJ4AN !t. FISCUS,
Sheriff.
(District court, W. D. Pennsyl'lJanfa. :May 81, 1890.) IlI'TOXICATING L1QUORB-INTERBTATE COMlIIERCE:'-:ORIGINAL PACKAGEB-CoMMIT;i.niN,T m DEFAULT OF BAII..-HABllASCORPUB,' . ,
Upon the return of a writ of hnbens corpus, it appeared that under a cri!Il.inal proceedillg against tbe prisoner for a violation of a local statute prohibiting the ' sale of malt or brewed liquors, etc., in the borough of Leechburg, in Armstrong oounty, PlI" and also for a violation of .tbegeperal license law of said state, .re--,' straining and re!l"t1lating the sale of vinous, spirituous, malt. Or brewed liquors, be. .was oommitted,.ln defaultef bail, to the jail of said county for trIaL The prisoner lllieged, ar,ut 111. the hearing on the hllbeuscnrpull undertookto show, tbat thllJiq,.· uurs for tl'ul,S'ale of Which be bad been arrested and committed had been hnportllli by a brewing ,company of' the. state of Ohio bom. that state into the that he, as the agept of said co.m,pl'wy, had sold lIame in tlle,qrig.: