POUNDAGE FEES.

Westport Times, Volume III, Issue 353, 17 September 1868, Page 3

POUNDAGE FEES.

(To the Editor of the Westport Times and Charleston Argus) Sir, —T cannot coincide in your objections to the Resident Magistrate's Act, as expressed in your leader of yesterdays issue. My objections are of a far more grave and serious nature, not to the Act itself, but too often in the incompetent and perverted manner in which the Act is interpreted. I can see nothing in that Act which empowers any person to detain a person in gaol for official fees ; if there is any clause to that effect, it is only equitable and just, that such should be sued for by the usual process, so that a prima facie case should be established, to prevent mistakes or attempts at extortion. It is well known to many that wheu a debtor has fulfilled the term of his sentence, no demand is made upon him. Who then pays these fees, and if they are justly and legally demandedfro ma single victim, why are they not applicable to the debtor, who has served his term of imprisonment. "With regard to the poundage fees, I will endeavor to give you an insight into them. The bailiff is empowered, by virtue of his warrant to seize any property, real or personal, of the defend int named in the warrant; the property so seized is then what is termed impounded, and when sold, the bailiff can claim such fees as are fixed by law. It is to be hope that in a single victim case, he (the bailiff) will not be a second Shylock, and demand the pound of flesh. With regard to the maintenance of this unfortunate debtor, it is evident that he cannot pay; it is said upon oath that the creditor will not pay, and it is certain that the Government contractor for food cannot afford to find rations free of expense —why, it stands thus then, gome one must pay; so it must be saddled on that broad-backed fellow, the public. Truly have you said that we are now become burdened with a state prisoner. Tours truly, Economist. Tuesday, Sept. 15,1868.

[We may state for the information of the writer, and others who feel interested in the case alluded to, that the debtor detained for poundage fees, was discharged on Monday last, though by whose authority we are unaware. — Ed. W. T.]