The Cordova daily times., 1922-09-02
DEFENDS BILL
 TO PROVIDE
 ALASKA COURT

CAt
 Sutherland as proposed by the oar of the Third Division. The Juneau bar association adopted resolutions against the bill To the resolutions Valdez attorney makes the 1oilo"- ing answer:
 The objections to the proposal for a territorial supreme court urged py the Juneau bar and whooped up py the Juneau newspapers are hn2ol1- ant if true They are two:
 l. Appeals would be more expen- sive in an Alaskan supreme court
 3, An Alaska supreme court would he less convenient than the clrcult court of appeals.
 Permit the, suggestion that Juneau wou1d make it's argument stronger by presenting some facts and 1is- rres. At the present time an ap- neal to the circuit court of appeals goas +o San Francisco unless both parties agree that it may be heard in Seattle. The appellate court meets in Seattle only once year in September. The record on appear is tvpewritten by the district court reporter and the Clerk of the dls- trict court. A copy is sent to San Francisco and printed at Sl.2o mage. Then each party must employ 2 San Francisco or Seattle attorney to argue the case or send ms o"n attorney down from Alaska, or he can depend entirely upon his printed brief prepared by an attorney.
 HEAVY COST IS SAVED
 The proposal of the Third division is to have the territorial appellate court, if established, consider cases on the typewriter record saving the printing expense of $1.25 a page which rms into the hundreds of dol- lars in cases where much testimony is taken. While printed records are the regular thing in appellate courts' the typewriter record is fully as leg- ible. and in a court having small husiness there is no reason why it could not be used.
 Even if the record were printed litigants would be saved the expense accounts of attorneys for the trip to San Francisco, and the extra fee the attorneys are justified in charg- ing because of an absence from home for several weeks.
 It would be interesting to learn how the Juneau lawyers figure the greater expense" of an appeal heard in Alaska. The supreme court would hold some of it's sessions at Juneau, so it is difficult for a rank outsider to vision either the greater expense or vast inconvenience that would be imposed upon Juneau lawyers and 1itigants by having their appeals heard in their home town.
 WHERE DOES JUNEAU GET TT
 As for inconvenience, it seems hardly necessary to reply to the bald assertion until some proof is offered to show that San Francisco is more convenient and accessible to any par; of Alaska than a town in or near the same division. The supreme court could sit in two or three places. Its sessions wOuld he short
 Many cases would be taken up to a territorial supreme court from the western divisions of Alaska that are not now appealed because of the pro- hibitive most The ordinary citizen cannot afford to appeal a case. Ne cessarily this situation is good for corporations and other wealthy lit igents. They can appeal regardless of cost, and are protected against many appeals where they have won in the district court, solely because the other party is too poor to carry the case up.
 Far be it from the humble from tier attorney to suggest or harbor the suspicion that the metropolitan attorneys of Juneau can see in the present system protection for their corporate clients and frequent trips to sunny California at the expense of a client.
 MERCY FOR CORPORATIONS
 If territorial supreme court should be created provisions should be made for certiorari from the circuit court of appeals which would be less expensive, than an original appeal to that court This would protect the -trodden corporations that fail ed to get what they wanted from the clyo1