UNITED STATES V. SIMONS. 709 �' f (. �mg and certifying the resuit of the searoh, is properly to be regarded as the compensation for making the search, and for the ofScial act of the clerk under his ofQcial responsibility in signing the certificate, and thus fixing his responsibility for certifying the resuit. The charge of 15 cents per folio for making the certificate isproper, and the service is performed and is neoessary. �A certificate may, by reason of a large number of names searehed against, cover many folios, and there is nothing ih the statute which indicates an intention that the charge of 15 cents for each name shall embrace the time and labor and care required in drawing the certificate, as well as the time and labor and care required in making the search, and the responsibility ineurred in certifying the resuit. Of course, no charge for affixing the seal is lawful, unless it is required in the particular case that the clerk shall affix the seal. ' These views have been submitted to the district judge, and I am authorized to say that he concurs in them. �The application of the petitioner is denied. ���United States v. Simons and another. (District Court, E. D. Michigan. June 20, 1881.) �1. Informer. �An informer is one yiho gives the flrst information to the govern-- ment of a violation of law, which induces the prosecution, and con- tributes to the conviction of the ofEender, or the recovery of a fine, penalty, or forfeiture. �2. Samb. �The fact that a person has procured testimony, be it never go valua- ble, does not entitle such person to an informer's share, where the fraud has been disclosed by others, and proceedings have been com- menced in consequence of such information. �3. SaME — CONSPIKACT. �Where an informer procures the arrest and conviction of certain members of a conspiracy, who, upon their examination, confess and implicate other conspirators engaged in the same fraudulent trans- ��� �
