Weekly Arizona journal-miner. [volume] (Prescott, Ariz.) 1903-1908, 1905-02-22
New Court Are Briefly
Discussed.
Representative Anderson Desires
to Hear From Citizens and Tax
payers on the Subject Before
Voting on 1t.

L D.
Miner:-There seems to be quite a
difference of opinion as to the merits
of the proposed superior court bill
now before the twenty third legisla-
tive assembly, and 1 write this open
letter for the purpose of securing the
opinions of the taxpayers of Yavapai
county. l shall be called upon at an
early date to vote for or against this
measure, therefore 1 desire everyone
who sees this letter to write me con-
corning the same, with an expression
of their opinion. l do not care to lis
ten to those who are personally inter
ested under the present conditions, or
to those who expect to be if the pro-
posed bill becomes a law. desire,
if possible, to represent the ideas of
majority of the taxpayers and citizens
of my county and especially of the
city of Prescott.
The law, as proposed will consoli
date the probate business of the coun
ty and the trial of cases as now tried
in the district court of the county, or
in other words, making the probate
court in addition to its present duties
a trial court, the judges to be elected
by the people and to serve four years.
There will be no change in the pro-
bate law of any kind or character, and
a person having a small estate may
settle the same in the proposed court,
as he may now in the present probate
court.
This court also will have the trial
of all cases concurrent with the dis
trict court as it now stands. 1t will
not necessitate the building of a
courthouse, or additional rooms in our
county. 1t will not necessitate the
calling of more grand jurors, because
there will be only so much business
for the grand juries to do and if it is
performed in the new court, there
will be no need for them in the other
court and vice versa. The bill pro-
poses to put the judge on fiat salary.
also the clerk, and to leave the fees
as they now stand-ths same, with the
exception of turning them into the
county treasury, according to the
idea advanced in the Cowan bill, in
relation to the secretary of states
Office of two years ago.
The following is a tabulation of the
costs of the present condition as com
pared to the condition under the pro-
posed bill. This has been prepared
by the advocates of the bill and based
upon an average as obtained in first
class counties.
First Cost to county in salaries
and fees under present conditions:
A. Salary of probate judge
(see sec. 1924 r. W $1,000. 90
B. Fees of probate judge and
clerk (see Secs 1897 and 1898
also Sec. 1924 including in
addition to his salary $1,000
the fees as set forth in the
above mentioned sections,
estimated for the yearl904, 5000. 90
This is a very conservative es-
innate, being $1,000 less than
the reality.
G. Fees of clerk of the dis
trict clerk (see Sec. 1884,
Civil fees, also Sec. 1886
Criminal fees) estimated for
the year 1904, 100000
This is less than a conserva-
tive estimate, being in reali-
ty $1,000 more.
Total, $500. 90
Second-Cost to county under pro-
posed superior court bill, first let US
say, the bill will consolidate the pro-
bate business and the trial court
business of the district court for the
county, and after the present term of
the probate judge, they are put upon
a fiat salary as hereinafter set forth,
for the reason that the probate judge
has been elected, and should be al
lowed to finish his term of Office,
heretofore, the cost as proposed will be
as follows:
A. Salary of superior judge, $1,000. 90
This includes his work as pro-
bate judge and work as trial
judge for the county.
B. Salary of clerk of the su-
perior court, 200O. 90
This includes the duties of
the present probate clerk,
also the duties of the pre-
sent probate clerk, also the