The Montgomery advertiser., 1902-12-04
Letters to the Editor.
s=s z: sss .sse ess ss.se@M Court of Appeals or Additional Su-
 preme Court Judges.

Editor The Advertiser:
 The new Constitution makes provision for Court of Appeals. which action was doubtless prompted by the fact that the Supreme Court is always behind with its work, and there is often a delay of sev- eral years in the final settlement of eases. It is but proper that this evil be cor rected by the next Legislature. But, is it best to attempt to do so by creating a Court of Appeals?
 The writer has given this matter good deal of thought and has made some little outside investigation and am decidedly in favor of adding additional associates to tn epresent Supreme Court rather than create a separate and distinct one.
 In the first place. the cost of the Court of Appeals will be greater than to add three additional Judges to the Supreme Court The salaries would probably amount to no more. but there will he oth- CT expenses entailed upon the State in running a separate court, and which would not be incurred by simply adding to the number of Supreme Court Judges such as clerical officials court room. etc There would doubtless be conflicts be- tween the two; cases might be sent to one which should have gone to the other to say nothing of the confusion that may arise over interpretations and construc- ticns of two separate and distinct tribu- nals.
 I have discussed this matter with emil nent lawyers from States that have both d SuI eme Court and Court of Appeals, and with one accord they say, cling to your old system. Have but one appellate court of final Jurisdiction. Increase the number of judges and divide them into sections, rather than seek relief through Court of Appeals
 We all know that an increase of the number of Supreme Court Judges ought to enable the Court to get along more rapidly, but unless the method of consult tation Is changed, but little time can he saved in that respect, and it makes no difference how rapidly they can be pre- pared, they can not be put out until dis cussed and considered by ;he court.
 This delay can he obviated. and I sug- gest the following plan: Add one or three new Judges so as to have an even lumber. Let them all sit one court and hear arguments and receive submis- sions. Divide them into Sections and B. The Chief Justice to preside over the consultations of A and the senior Asso- ciate over B. and cases to be referred alternately to said sections.
 Whenever Constitutional question arsises, or before everything a former de- cision. let them come together and act a full court
 This plan will certainly save much time for consultation and will really accomplish the purpose of two courts and at the same time avoid all conflicts or embarrass- ments
 There is no real reason why the de- ision of either section can't De as safe ard sound as if put out by the entire number. For years we had but three Judges. and during that time the Ala bama Reports gained place in the very front rank of legal authorities.
 Bringing them together before overrul- ing cases or settling Constitutional ques- tions, will be a safeguard against con- f1icts and inconsistencies.
 We all know that relief is needed. that there is too much delay in the final ad- Indication of cases and that the present number of Judges Is inadequate for the work.
 Alabama. with an additional Supreme Court Judge, would still be behind in numbers of sCme of the smaller States.
 I also suggest that a statute be passed requiring that decision in civil cases be rut out with reference to the date of submission.
 This Is a matter that should be acted on by the next Legislature, and I invite an expression from the members of the bar on the subject. Lawyer