Vernon County censor. [volume] (Viroqua, Wis.) 1865-1955, 1910-08-31
TELL THE TRUTH-A REPLY
BY J. HENRY BENNETT

To THE PUBLIC:
The gentleman opposing me for dis
trict attorney, against whom do not
bear the slightest i'll will personally,
has suggested throughout the county
by means of the public press and thou
sands of circular letttr the TO ,osition
that when | became a ndate for
county judge of this county. one wear
and seven months ago. that the &c.,
O00 case, so called, with Monroe county,
was then pending and that at that time
| was not averse to putting aside the
interests of the public in that case and
assuming the county judgeship. This
is very clever politics and suggests the
cunning generaship of those who are
behind his candidacy. Let the truth be
told and / shall be satisfied When |
became candidate for county Judge of
this county this important case had
been decided in our favor by the state
board of control and was then ended.
At least it was then ended as every one
supposed, as | believed, and as
Judge Higbee afterwards held. The
state board of control has exclusive ju-
risdiction of the hearing of any such
matter and the only remedy is thatpr
vided by statute. Since the present
statute has existed, no attempt to re-
view the decisions of the state board
of control by writ of certiorari has ev-
err been made in Wisconsin. However,
notwithstanding there was no prece-
dent under the existing statutes for
taking the matter into the courts, the
county board of Monroe county nearly
year afterwards ordered the matter
taken into and through ell the courts
of the state and we have the case still
with us. Upon the trial of the case
before Judge Higbee / contended that
the case was ended by the decision OF
the board of control and the statutory
remedy was exclusive, and that the de.
cisiosl of the state BOARD Of contro
could not be reviewed upon certiorari,
and JUDGE HIGREE SO HELD. Sc
that the gentleman now opposing me
for district attorney takes for politica
purposes only the identical position OF
Monroe county and which Judge Higbet
repudiated. If am wrong in contend
ing that the case was ended and forev'
er settled by the board of control anC
thus ended when ran for county judgC
and that it cannot lawfully be reviewed
by the courts | am in the excellent
company of the circuit judge-a mos
able lawyer who agrees with me
Were the gentleman opposing me TO b.
elected district attorney and as suci
able to convince the supreme court Of
the same proposition he seeks to con
vince the people and thereby to be elect
ed he would assume the identical posi-
ton of the attorneys for Monroe coun
ty and thus assist them IN defeating
Vernon county in the litigation. Thu
in effect he publicly announces hi
views as to the l4w-quite unconscious
ly no doubt--and II correct IN his posi-
tic: he we.id unconsciously bring abou
The reversal of the case to the conse
quent loss to our people If $40 900 q
more providing the court could be mao
to believe the identical theory he ask
the people to adopt. As TO ire otne
important vases the county has pSndiri
desire TO ,ay that they were nese
hoard of AZ the time became candi
date for county Judge. can only as
the people ~ beware Che aleyenth-hou
campaign document.
Very truly.
J. HENRY BENNETT,
District Attorney.