A-41209, MARCH 15, 1932, 11 COMP. GEN. 347

A-41209: Mar 15, 1932

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

000 IS APPLICABLE TO THE GROSS AMOUNT OF NATURALIZATION FEES COLLECTED BY THE CLERK. AS FOLLOWS: THERE IS SUBMITTED HEREWITH FOR YOUR DECISION THE QUESTION OF THE PROPER METHOD OF ACCOUNTING FOR NATURALIZATION FEES COLLECTED BY THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT. WHO IS EX OFFICIO CLERK OF THE LAKE SUPERIOR COURTS AT EAST CHICAGO. NATURALIZATION SUPPLIES HAVE BEEN FURNISHED FOR THE USE OF THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AT CROWN POINT AND FOR THE USE OF THE SUPERIOR COURTS AT EAST CHICAGO. SUPPLIES WERE SENT TO THE CIRCUIT COURT AT CROWN POINT IN 1906. DURING THE FISCAL YEAR 1930 THE NATURALIZATION TRANSACTIONS CONDUCTED BY THIS CLERK WERE AS FOLLOWS: TABLE DECLARATIONS PETITIONS TOTAL FEES CIRCUIT COURT.

A-41209, MARCH 15, 1932, 11 COMP. GEN. 347

CLERKS OF COURTS - NATURALIZATION FEES THE PROVISIONS IN SECTION 13 OF THE ACT OF JUNE 29, 1906, 34 STAT. 600, AS AMENDED, THAT CLERKS OF COURTS EXERCISING JURISDICTION IN NATURALIZATION PROCEEDINGS SHALL BE PERMITTED TO RETAIN ONE-HALF OF THE FEES COLLECTED BY THEM IN ANY FISCAL YEAR UP TO THE SUM OF $3,000, APPLY TO THE PERSON OF THE CLERK RATHER THAN TO THE COURT, AND THE LIMITATION OF $3,000 IS APPLICABLE TO THE GROSS AMOUNT OF NATURALIZATION FEES COLLECTED BY THE CLERK, NOTWITHSTANDING THE CLERK MAY BE CLERK OF ONE STATE COURT AND EX OFFICIO CLERK OF VARIOUS OTHER COURTS BEING ELECTED AS CLERK OF COURT FOR THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT RATHER THAN FOR A PARTICULAR COURT.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL MCCARL TO THE SECRETARY OF LABOR, MARCH 15, 1932:

THERE HAS BEEN RECEIVED, PRESUMABLY BY YOUR DIRECTION, A LETTER DATED MARCH 3, 1932, FROM THE COMMISSIONER OF NATURALIZATION, AS FOLLOWS:

THERE IS SUBMITTED HEREWITH FOR YOUR DECISION THE QUESTION OF THE PROPER METHOD OF ACCOUNTING FOR NATURALIZATION FEES COLLECTED BY THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, CROWN POINT, INDIANA, WHO IS EX OFFICIO CLERK OF THE LAKE SUPERIOR COURTS AT EAST CHICAGO, GARY, AND HAMMOND, ALL SITUATED WITHIN THE COUNTY OF LAKE, AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 13 OF THE ACT OF JUNE 29, 1906, AS AMENDED. 34 STAT. 600; U.S.C.T. 8, SEC. 402.

NATURALIZATION SUPPLIES HAVE BEEN FURNISHED FOR THE USE OF THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AT CROWN POINT AND FOR THE USE OF THE SUPERIOR COURTS AT EAST CHICAGO, GARY, AND HAMMOND SEPARATELY, EACH ONE HAVING ITS OWN DECLARATION OF INTENTION AND PETITION FOR CITIZENSHIP VOLUMES, BEARING SEPARATE SERIES OF NUMBERING. SUPPLIES WERE SENT TO THE CIRCUIT COURT AT CROWN POINT IN 1906, THE SUPERIOR COURT AT HAMMOND IN 1910, THE SUPERIOR COURT AT GARY ON 1917, AND THE SUPERIOR COURT AT EAST CHICAGO IN 1928.

DURING THE FISCAL YEAR 1930 THE NATURALIZATION TRANSACTIONS CONDUCTED BY THIS CLERK WERE AS FOLLOWS:

TABLE

DECLARATIONS PETITIONS TOTAL FEES CIRCUIT COURT, CROWN POINT ------ 1 --- ------ $5.00 SUPERIOR COURT, EAST CHICAGO ---- 61

152 1,825.00 SUPERIOR COURT, GARY ------------ 175 201 2,885.00 SUPERIOR COURT, HAMMOND --------- 65 123 1,555.00

6,270.00

DURING THE FISCAL YEAR 1931 THE NATURALIZATION TRANSACTIONS CONDUCTED BY THIS CLERK WERE AS FOLLOWS:

TABLE

DECLARATIONS PETITIONS TOTAL FEES CIRCUIT COURT, CROWN POINT ------ 1 --- ------ $5.00 SUPERIOR COURT, EAST CHICAGO ---- 109

149 2,035.00 SUPERIOR COURT, GARY ------------ 466 287 5,200.00 SUPERIOR COURT, HAMMOND --------- 96 120 1,680.00

8,920.00

DURING THE FIRST HALF OF THE FISCAL YEAR 1932 THE NATURALIZATION TRANSACTIONS BY THIS CLERK WERE AS FOLLOWS:

TABLE

DECLARATIONS PETITIONS TOTAL FEES CIRCUIT COURT, CROWN POINT ------ 1 --- ------ $5.00 SUPERIOR COURT, EAST CHICAGO ---- 59

97 1,265.00 SUPERIOR COURT, GARY ------------ 172 148 2,340.00 SUPERIOR COURT, HAMMOND ---------82 85 1,260.00

4,870.00

THE QUESTION FOR CONSIDERATION IS WHETHER THE ABOVE COURTS, UNDER THE LAW, SHOULD BE CONSIDERED (A) AS ONE COURT; (B) THE CIRCUIT COURT AS ONE COURT AND THE SUPERIOR COURTS AT EAST CHICAGO, GARY, AND HAMMOND AS ONE COURT; OR (C) EACH OF THE ABOVE COURTS CONSIDERED AS A SEPARATE AND DISTINCT COURT.

TAKING THE FISCAL YEAR 1930 AS AN EXAMPLE, THE ACCOUNTING WOULD BE AS FOLLOWS:

TABLE

PLAN A GROSS COLLECTIONS ---------- ------------ $6,270.00

RETAINABLE UNDER THE LAW --------------- 3,000.00

DUE THE UNITED STATES -------------------------------- $3,270.00

TOTAL DUE THE UNITED STATES -------------------------- $3,270.00

PLAN B GROSS COLLECTIONS:

CIRCUIT COURT -------------------------- $ 5.00

RETAINABLE UNDER THE LAW --------------- 2.50

DUE THE UNITED STATES -------------------------------- $ 2.50

SUPERIOR COURTS ------------------------ $6,265.00

RETAINABLE UNDER THE LAW --------------- 3,000.00

DUE THE UNITED STATES -------------------------------- 3,265.00

TOTAL DUE THE UNITED STATES -------------------------- $3,267.50 1HDR XXXXX00001-003 AFLITEDATA69160-000

PLAN C GROSS COLLECTIONS:

CIRCUIT COURT, CROWN POINT ------------- $ 5.00

RETAINABLE UNDER THE LAW --------------- 2.50

DUE THE UNITED STATES -------------------------------- $ 2.50

SUPERIOR COURT, E. CHICAGO ------------- $1,825.00

RETAINABLE UNDER THE LAW --------------- 912.50

DUE THE UNITED STATES -------------------------------- $ 912.50 GROSS COLLECTIONS:

SUPERIOR COURT, GARY ------------------- $2,885.00 RETAINABLE UNDER THE LAW ---------------- 1,442.50

DUE THE UNITED STATES -------------------------------- $1,442.50

SUPERIOR COURT, HAMMOND ---------------- $1,555.00

RETAINABLE UNDER THE LAW --------------- 777.50

DUE THE UNITED STATES -------------------------------- $ 777.50

TOTAL DUE THE UNITED STATES -------------------------- $3,135.00

FROM THE FOREGOING IT WILL BE SEEN THAT UNDER PLAN (A) THE CLERK RETAINS $3,000 AND THE GOVERNMENT RECEIVES $3,270; UNDER PLAN (B) THE CLERK RETAINS $3,002.50 AND THE GOVERNMENT RECEIVES $3,267.50; UNDER PLAN (C) THE CLERK RETAINS $3,135.00 AND THE GOVERNMENT RECEIVES $3,135.00. VIEW OF THE DIVERSITY OF AMOUNTS RETAINABLE BY THE CLERK AND DUE THE UNITED STATES THE MATTER COMES WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF YOUR OFFICE BY VIRTUE OF SEC. 305 OF THE BUDGET AND ACCOUNTING ACT, 42 STAT. 24.

SEC. 3 OF THE ACT OF JUNE 29, 1906, AS AMENDED, 34 STAT. 596; U.S.C.T. 8, SECS. 357, 358, 408, BESTOWS NATURALIZATION JURISDICTION ON CERTAIN SPECIFIED COURTS, AND SEC. 13 OF THE ACT OF JUNE 29, 1906, AS AMENDED, SUPRA, PRESCRIBES THE AMOUNTS TO BE COLLECTED AND THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING BY THE CLERK OF EACH AND EVERY COURT EXERCISING JURISDICTION IN NATURALIZATION CASES.

ARTICLE 7, SEC. 161, CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF INDIANA, PROVIDES THAT THE JUDICIAL POWER OF THE STATE SHALL BE VESTED IN A SUPREME COURT, IN CIRCUIT COURTS, AND IN SUCH OTHER COURTS AS THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY MAY ESTABLISH. SEC. 168 PROVIDES THAT THE CIRCUIT COURTS SHALL EACH CONSIST OF ONE JUDGE, AND SHALL HAVE SUCH CIVIL AND CRIMINAL JURISDICTION AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED BY LAW.

BURNS ANNOTATED INDIANA STATUTES, 1926, VOL. 1, SEC. 159, PROVIDES THAT THERE SHALL BE ELECTED, IN EACH AND EVERY COUNTY, BY THE VOTERS THEREOF, A CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT. THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT SHALL CONTINUE IN OFFICE FOUR YEARS. VOL. 3, SEC. 1184, PROVIDES THAT AT THE GENERAL ELECTION IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE EXPIRATION OF THE TERM OF THE PRESENT INCUMBENT, AND EVERY FOUR YEARS, THEREAFTER, IN EACH COUNTY, THERE SHALL BE ELECTED A CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, WHO SHALL HOLD HIS OFFICE DURING SUCH TERM, AND WHO SHALL GIVE BOND. VOL. 1, SEC. 1432, PROVIDES THAT THE CIRCUIT COURT SHALL BE HELD IN THE RESPECTIVE COUNTIES AT SUCH TIMES AS MAY BE FIXED BY LAW. SAID COURT SHALL BE STYLED,--- "CIRCUIT," ACCORDING TO THE NAME OF THE COUNTY IN WHICH IT MAY BE HELD. VOL. 1, SEC. 1469, PROVIDES THAT THE COUNTY OF LAKE SHALL BE AND CONSTITUTE THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE LAKE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF INDIANA. SEC. 1476 PROVIDES THAT THE CLERK OF THE SAID COUNTY OF LAKE, AS AND FOR COMPENSATION FOR THE ADDITIONAL SERVICES PERFORMED BY HIM IN SAID COURT, IN ATTENDANCE UPON AND IN THE PERFORMANCE OF HIS DUTIES APPERTAINING TO SAID COURT, SHALL RECEIVE $2,000 PER ANNUM IN ADDITION TO THE SALARY NOW AND OTHERWISE PROVIDED BY LAW FOR SUCH OFFICER. THIS SECTION HAS BEEN AMENDED, AS SHOWN IN THE 1929 SUPPLEMENT, VOL. 4, SO THAT THE CLERK SHALL RECEIVE SUCH COMPENSATION IN ADDITION TO THE SALARY NOW AND OTHERWISE PROVIDED BY LAW FOR SUCH OFFICER AS MAY BE ALLOWED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SAID COUNTY, WHICH SHALL BE PAYABLE FROM THE FEES COLLECTED BY HIM. VOL. 1, SEC. 1478, PROVIDES THAT THE CLERK OF THE LAKE CIRCUIT COURT SHALL BE EX OFFICIO CLERK OF THE LAKE SUPERIOR COURT, AND SHALL MAINTAIN AN OFFICE IN THE CITY OF GARY AS PROVIDED FOR THE TRANSACTION OF BUSINESS OF ROOM THREE OF SAID COURT. SEC. 1479 PROVIDES THAT THE SAID COURTS SHALL EACH HAVE ORIGINAL, APPELLATE, AND CONCURRENT JURISDICTION WITH THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE COUNTY IN ALL CASES AND ACTIONS AT LAW AND IN EQUITY WHATSOEVER, AND IN ALL OTHER CAUSES, MATTERS, AND PROCEEDINGS OF WHICH SUCH CIRCUIT COURTS NOW HAVE OR MAY HEREAFTER HAVE JURISDICTION. SEC. 1479 WAS AMENDED IN 1927 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE CLERK OF THE LAKE CIRCUIT COURT SHALL BE EX OFFICIO CLERK OF THE LAKE SUPERIOR COURT AND SHALL MAINTAIN AN OFFICE IN THE CITY OF HAMMOND, CITY OF GARY, AND CITY OF EAST CHICAGO. (SEE 1929 SUPP.)

THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR LAKE COUNTY WAS ORIGINALLY CREATED PURSUANT TO THE ACT OF 1895, P. 210, AND IN THE CASE OF WOODS V. MCCAY, 144 IND. 316, WAS JUDICIALLY DETERMINED TO BE CONSTITUTIONAL. REFERENCE IS MADE TO THE INTENT OF THE LEGISLATURE IN CREATING SUCH COURTS AS TO BE ONE OF CONVENIENCE AS THE SESSIONS WERE TO BE HELD IN CITIES, OTHER THAN THE COUNTY SEAT, CONTAINING 4,000 OR MORE INHABITANTS ACCORDING TO A GIVEN CENSUS. IT WILL BE SEEN, THEREFORE, THAT THE LEGISLATURE FOUND IT TO BE IN THE INTERESTS OF THE INHABITANTS OF THE COUNTY OF LAKE TO CREATE ADDITIONAL COURTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRANSACTING BUSINESS PROPERLY BROUGHT BEFORE THE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT. THAT WHEREAS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE ONLY ONE CIRCUIT COURT COULD BE CREATED IN ANY ONE COUNTY IT WAS PROPER TO CREATE ADDITIONAL COURTS WITH CONCURRENT JURISDICTION WITHIN THE COUNTY. THE LEGISLATURE SAW NO NECESSITY FOR APPOINTING INDEPENDENT CLERKS FOR THESE CONCURRENT COURTS AND PROVIDED THAT THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT SHOULD BE EX OFFICIO CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURTS. HOWEVER, SEC. 13 OF THE ACT OF JUNE 29, 1906, SUPRA, PROVIDES SPECIFICALLY THAT THE CLERK OF EACH AND EVERY COURT EXERCISING JURISDICTION IN NATURALIZATION CASES SHALL CHARGE, COLLECT, AND ACCOUNT FOR FEES.

DOES SECTION 13 OF THE ACT OF JUNE 29, 1906, AS AMENDED, INTEND THAT THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF FEES RETAINABLE BY ANY ONE CLERK, REGARDLESS OF THE NUMBER OF COURTS FOR WHICH HE MAY BE CLERK, SHALL NOT EXCEED $3,000 IN ANY ONE FISCAL YEAR, OR IS THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT RETAINABLE BY THE CLERK TO BE DETERMINED BY THE VOLUME OF TRANSACTIONS IN EACH INDIVIDUAL COURT? IT HAS LONG BEEN THE POLICY OF THE BUREAU IN SUCH CASES AS THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR ESSEX COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS, WHERE THERE IS A COURT EXERCISING NATURALIZATION JURISDICTION IN BOTH LAWRENCE AND SALEM, WITH SEPARATE SUPPLIES AND RECORDS, BUT WITH ONE AND THE SAME CLERK OF COURT, TO COMBINE THE FEES AND LIMIT THE CLERK TO A MAXIMUM OF $3,000 DURING ANY ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR BOTH COURTS.

SECTION 13 OF THE ACT OF JUNE 29, 1906, 34 STAT. 600, AS AMENDED (SEC. 402, TITLE 8, U.S. CODE), PROVIDES, IN PART, AS FOLLOWS:

THE CLERK OF EACH AND EVERY COURT EXERCISING JURISDICTION IN NATURALIZATION CASES SHALL CHARGE, COLLECT, AND ACCOUNT FOR THE FOLLOWING FEES IN EACH PROCEEDING:

THE CLERKS OF COURTS EXERCISING JURISDICTION IN NATURALIZATION PROCEEDINGS SHALL BE PERMITTED TO RETAIN ONE-HALF OF THE FEES IN ANY FISCAL YEAR UP TO THE SUM OF $3,000, AND ALL FEES RECEIVED BY SUCH CLERKS IN NATURALIZATION PROCEEDINGS IN EXCESS OF SUCH AMOUNT SHALL BE ACCOUNTED FOR AND PAID OVER TO SAID BUREAU AS IN CASE OF OTHER FEES TO WHICH THE UNITED STATES MAY BE ENTITLED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER.

THE CLERKS OF THE VARIOUS COURTS EXERCISING JURISDICTION IN NATURALIZATION PROCEEDINGS SHALL PAY ALL ADDITIONAL CLERICAL FORCE THAT MAY BE REQUIRED IN PERFORMING THE DUTIES IMPOSED BY THE NATURALIZATION LAWS UPON THE CLERKS OF COURTS FROM FEES RECEIVED BY SUCH CLERKS IN NATURALIZATION PROCEEDINGS.

PAYMENT FOR THE ADDITIONAL CLERICAL ASSISTANCE HEREIN AUTHORIZED SHALL BE IN THE MANNER AND UNDER SUCH REGULATIONS AS THE SECRETARY OF LABOR MAY PRESCRIBE. IN CASE THE CLERK OF ANY COURT EXERCISING NATURALIZATION JURISDICTION COLLECTS FEES IN EXCESS OF THE SUM OF $6,000 IN ANY FISCAL YEAR THE SECRETARY OF LABOR MAY ALLOW SALARIES, FOR NATURALIZATION PURPOSES ONLY, TO PAY FOR CLERICAL ASSISTANCE, AND TO BE SELECTED AND EMPLOYED BY THAT CLERK, ADDITIONAL TO THE CLERICAL FORCE, FOR WHICH CLERKS OF COURTS ARE REQUIRED BY THIS SECTION TO PAY FROM FEES RECEIVED BY SUCH CLERKS IN NATURALIZATION PROCEEDINGS, IF IN THE OPINION OF SAID SECRETARY THE NATURALIZATION BUSINESS OF SUCH CLERK WARRANTS FURTHER ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE. THE WHOLE AMOUNT ALLOWED FOR A FISCAL YEAR TO THE CLERK OF A COURT AND HIS ASSISTANTS FROM NATURALIZATION FEES AND ANY APPROPRIATION MADE FOR CARRYING ON THE WORK OF THE BUREAU OF NATURALIZATION SHALL BE BASED UPON AND NOT EXCEED THE ONE-HALF OF THE GROSS RECEIPTS OF SAID CLERK FROM NATURALIZATION FEES DURING THE FISCAL YEAR IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING, UNLESS THE NATURALIZATION BUSINESS OF THE CLERK OF ANY COURT DURING THE YEAR SHALL BE IN EXCESS OF THE NATURALIZATION BUSINESS OF THE PRECEDING YEAR, IN WHICH EVENT THE AMOUNT ALLOWED MAY BE INCREASED TO AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO ONE-HALF THE ESTIMATED GROSS RECEIPTS OF THE SAID CLERK FROM NATURALIZATION FEES DURING THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR. THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION RELATING TO THE RETENTION AS COMPENSATION BY CLERKS OF COURTS OF NATURALIZATION FEES SHALL NOT APPLY TO CLERKS OF UNITED STATES COURTS WHO BY LAW ARE TO RECEIVE A SALARY IN LIEU OF FEES OR OTHER EMOLUMENTS. (JUNE 29, 1926, C. 3592, SEC. 13, 34 STAT. 600; JUNE 25, 1910, C. 401, SEC. 1, 36 STAT. 829; JUNE 12, 1917, C. 27, SEC. 1, 40 STAT. 171; FEB. 26, 1919, C. 49, SECS. 1, 2, 40 STAT. 1182; FEB. 11, 1921, C. 46, 41 STAT. 1099; MAR. 4, 1921, C. 161, SEC. 1, 41 STAT. 1412.)

IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE FIRST PARAGRAPH ABOVE QUOTED DEALS WITH THE CLERK OF EACH AND EVERY COURT, BUT THAT PART OF THE SECTION HAS REFERENCE TO CHARGING, COLLECTING, AND ACCOUNTING FOR THE FEES IN EACH NATURALIZATION PROCEEDING RATHER THAN AS TO THE AMOUNT OF FEES COLLECTED THE CLERK MAY RETAIN. THE SECOND PROVISION QUOTED IS TO THE EFFECT THAT CLERKS OF COURTS MAY BE PERMITTED TO RETAIN ONE-HALF OF THE FEES COLLECTED IN ANY ONE FISCAL YEAR NOT TO EXCEED $3,000, AND THE EXCESS SHALL BE PAID OVER TO THE BUREAU OF NATURALIZATION. IT IS APPARENT FROM THE TERMS OF THIS PROVISION OF LAW AND THE REMAINING PORTION OF THE SECTION, RELATING TO THE ADDITIONAL ALLOWANCES FOR CLERICAL ASSISTANCE, THAT THE LIMITATION OF $3,000 WAS INTENDED TO APPLY TO THE PERSON OF THE CLERK RATHER THAN TO EACH COURT. THAT IS TO SAY, THE ACT PROVIDES THAT THE CLERK SHALL NOT RETAIN IN EXCESS OF $3,000 IN ANY ONE FISCAL YEAR, REGARDLESS OF THE FACT THAT, AS IN THE CASE PRESENTED, THE CLERK MAY BE THE CLERK OF A CIRCUIT COURT AND EX OFFICIO CLERK OF THREE SUPERIOR COURTS IN THE SAME JUDICIAL DISTRICT. TO HOLD OTHERWISE WOULD BE, IN EFFECT, TO ALLOW THE STATE LEGISLATURE, BY ITS ENACTMENTS CREATING ADDITIONAL STATE COURTS IN THE SAME JUDICIAL DISTRICT, TO CIRCUMVENT AND RENDER OF NO EFFECT THE LIMITATION IMPOSED BY A FEDERAL STATUTE. IN A CASE SUCH AS HERE PRESENTED, WHERE THE CLERK OF THE FOUR COURTS OR BRANCHES OF COURTS IS ELECTED FOR THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT RATHER THAN FOR A PARTICULAR COURT OR BRANCH THEREOF, EVEN THOUGH HIS ELECTION IS AS CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND AS SUCH HE BECOMES EX OFFICIO CLERK OF THE OTHER COURTS OR BRANCHES OF COURTS, THE INCUMBENT BEING THE SAME, IT MUST BE HELD THAT THE LIMITATION OF $3,000 IS APPLICABLE REGARDLESS OF WHETHER UNDER A STRICT LEGAL INTERPRETATION THE COURTS MAY BE CONSIDERED AS ONE, TWO, OR FOUR SEPARATE COURTS.

IN SPECIFIC ANSWER TO THE QUESTION SUBMITTED I HAVE TO ADVISE THAT FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACCOUNTING FOR NATURALIZATION FEES THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF LAKE COUNTY, IND., SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO ADOPT PLAN "A" AS SET FORTH IN YOUR LETTER. THAT IS TO SAY, HE SHOULD COMBINE ALL COLLECTIONS MADE BY HIM AND FROM THAT AMOUNT RETAIN ONE-HALF OF THE FEES COLLECTED NOT IN EXCESS OF $3,000.