Iditarod pioneer., 1911-12-16

Washlngton-Ala~ka Bank of Nevada be determined and established, or until further order of the court.
 :. For such other and further relief in the premises as the court may think just.
 This petition was denied, and the order denying the same, on file in the office of the clerk, states that there was stipulation agreed upon by the attorneys to the effect that the only question presented to the court was whether the parties whom Dolge rep- resented had right to intervene. It Is claimed that there was no stipulation made in open court to that effect. Ask the judge why this petition was denied. Fourth - It. is claimed that since Judge Overfeld has been on the bench at Fairbanks it is practically mpossi- be for the district attorney to secure convictions, especially for violations of the liquor laws, and that the attitude assumed by the judge toward the dis rrict attorney's office is largely reSpon- sIble for failure 10 convict.
 Fifth-The claim is made that the attitude of the court toward the office of the district attorney, and especially toward Mir. Crossley, has been dis courteous and detrimental to the cases which the district attorneys office are endeavoring to prosecute for the gov ernment, and is matter of much comment, not only among the public in general, but among the attorneys and jurors who have been in the court room
 Sixlh-It is claimed that the judge has attempted to place Mr.. CrossIey in such position that he could be held in cortempt.
 Seventh-It is claimed that an edito- rial appearing in the Fairbanks News Miner under date of May 15, 1911, which seriously reflected upon Mir. CrCssley and especially the manner in which he had attempted to prosecute liquor cases, was shown to the judge in his chambers before it's publication. and that he was fully aware of the contents of this editorial before it's publication.
 Eighlh-It is claimed that Mir. Cross ley's objections to certain liquor li- censes are frequently overruled by the court without any witnesses called bv the district attorney in support of his objections being heard That the judge assumes to pass upon applications for liquor licenses without giving those in terested an opportunity to be heard.
 Ninth-At the February, 1911. term of court the regular panel of jurors was reduced to fifteen men, and Mr. Crossley's request to the court that the panel be increased to the regular number was disallowed, and as con sequence it was necessary to summon jurors under writ of special venire in practically every case that was tried during the term. with the result that some of the jurors selected in tha, manner were decidedly unsat sfactory, being drawn from cigar stores, sa- looms, etc.
 Tenth-As instances of the manner in which the court shows it's prejudice, ln the case of the United States vs. William Reagan, on charge of rape, the judge refused to allow as evidence certain evidence showing that the de- fendant had induced the girl upon whom the assault had been made to drink beer and whisky, although Mr. Crossley cited authorities to support his contention that such evidence should be allowed. During this case the judge is said to have scored Mr. Crossley in open court stating that he had been the most persistent and an- moving attorney that practiced before him, and intimated that it was, eithe.' rom ignorance, a cOntemptuous dlsre- gard of the court, or because he wanted more favors than any other attorney. It is said that MT. CrossIey endeavored to reply that he wanted no favors. only what he was entitled to as an officer of the court, but that he was cut short by the judge and not given an opportunity to answer. It is stated that in this case the court had given out that there would be no time limit to the closing arguments, and the attorneys for the defense were allowed to consume as much time as they wishel while Mr. Crossley was stopped by he judge after he had been talking for twenty-five minutes
 Ag ... rd~a q