The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1909-07-15
Court Takes Mo Actios 10 Segafd
To Contest BstNaan Rival
Lighting Companies
CLAIM AIN In Piled FRANCHISE
Attorneys fer Kenosha Electric Rail
way Company Claim Old Com
pany Acted Zoo Late in
Surrenderil4g Franchise


No action was taken in the Circuit
Court Friday in connection with
the fight between the Kenosba Gas and
Electric Company and the Kenosha
Electric Railway Company for the
rights of building electric Lighting
plants in Kenosha and the ,court con
tinued the matter indefinitely with the
understanding that one Of the Milwau
kee Judges will be called iii to hear
the case if the attorneys are ready with
it before the court returns FROM his
annual vacation. The temporary in
junction will remain in force until it
is made permanent or dismissed by a
Judge called in to hear the case and
the attorneys will be given I'll the time
they desire to prepare their briefs in
the case. Neither of the attorneys
was ready to take up the matter which
is certain to be fraught with great in
terest to people of all the larger cities
Of the state.
Attorney Thomas w. Spence Of the
firm Of Quarles Spence and Quarles,
which firm represents the Kenosha
Electric Railway Company in the cases
did not hesitate to speak of the do
Tense which his client will make to
the claims of the Kenosha Gas and
Electric Company. Mr. Spence stated
that the lzenosha Electric Railway
Company In it's action would insist that
the company had an implied franchise
from the time the city made contract
with it to furnish street lights to the
city and that the action of the Coun-
ci1 in making this contract implied that
the city was willing to give the com
pany franchise under which it might
carry out the provisions of the pact.
He held further that the Kenosha Gas
and Electric Company in surrendering
its franchise had acted too late as at
the time the franchise was surrendered
the City, COUNCIL had not only made a
ontraet With the other company and
bus implied the rights granted in the
anchSse afterward passed by that
body, but that it had taken up the
formal consideration of the franchise
ordinance as a legislative body, had
given it reading and had ordered
it published. This fact he claimed
made it impossible for the action of
the Beggs company in surrendering it's
franchise later to take away any of
the rights of the City Council to pass
the franchise, He holds. that the fact
that the franchise was actually being
considered by the Council at the time
the surrender of the former franchise
was made stopped the Kenosha Gas
and Electric Company from claiming
snytr5ghts Of protection from the State
Railroad Commission against the fran
ehise then pending. He stated that
thegtheory ON which he worked was as
old as the theory of the ex post facto
law and that the Kenosha Electric
Railway was seeking to have the Com
mission Gust a franchise which was
under legislative consideration by the
Council ct the time the other company
registered with the State Commission.
The next move in the case, however.
willSbe the fling of an application with
the State Commission for a permit for
the Kenosha Electric Railway Com
pany and il is probable that this will
be fled within few days. The at
torneys, while claiming that the point
they have raised in the defense is one
that they will be able to hold under the
law, are making assurance doubly sure
by seeking permit. Should such a
permit be issued all that will be neces-
sary to give the rights to the Kenosha
Electric Railway Company is for the
Council to take up the franchise ordi-
nance again and pass it. There is no
doubt but that the present Council
would vote for the passage of Inc ordi-
nance under such circumstances,