
    LUTHER CLAY SLAVENS v. THE UNITED STATES.
    [38 C. Cls. R., 574; 196 U. S. R., 229.]
    
      On the claimant's A.ppecil.
    
    The only question in the case is whether the clerk of a court is entitled to fees for his “ duplicate ” account. ,
    The court below decides:
    1. The clerks of courts of the United' States are not entitled to fees for the “ duplicate ” of their accounts to be retained in their offices as provided by the Act 2Sd February, 1875 (18 Stat. L., 333), which requires that “accounts and vouchers of clerks, marshals, and district attorneys shall he made in duplicate.”
    
    2. The burden of making out an account is on the creditor, and in the case of a public officer his accounts must be in the form i>re-scribed by law. Until a clerk, marshal, or district attorney has made his account in duplicate, he has not made it.
   The decision of the court below is affirmed on the same grounds. The case of W. E. Travis was at the same time affirmed for the reasons given in the Slavens case.

Mr. Justice Day delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court January 9,1905.  