The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1917-11-01
EXPECT An EARLY DECISION
Testimony of F. T. Holt Of This County
Held to Be Most Important in the Eff
fort of the State to Break Up the
milk Trust Among Farmers.

d The question of whether Frank T.
Holt of Pleasant Prairie, president of
the Milk Producers Association, was
obliged to answer the interrogations of
} the attorney general of the state in his
purpose to inquire into the business
transactions of the association, was on
Saturday submitted to Judge E. B.
J Belden in the Circuit Court in Racine
The examination of Holt and three
other members of the association be-
fore Court Commissioner John G. Slater
at Kenosha Friday, was halted by
stipulation in order that the court
might decide several important ques-
tions which arose and which prevented
the defendant Holt from making reply.
These questions were argued by Attor-
neys Thomas M. Kearney, ST., and Will
liam d Thompson for the defendants,
and Assistant Attorney General John
H. Baker and District Attorney Villas
Ell. Whaley before Judge Belden on
Saturday. The court took the matters
under advisement, and while there is
4
is believed one will be forthcoming for
the reason that upon the decision hangs
the fate of the examination of a mum
Der of milk producers.
1T was the contention of Attorney
Kearney that the state could offer no
complete immunity from penalty or
forfeiture if the defendants testified
while the state insisted that the sta
tutes and especially Section 1791-m
provided that immunity. 1t was the
contention of the defendants attorney,
. however, that the measure of immunity
was not broad enough and that there
was no provision for complete i'm
munity. He challenged the state to
produce any such immunity statute.
It was contended by the defendants
that in case the witnesses were forced
J to testify they would be unable to re-
!, cover for the milk they had already
delivered and not collected for and
Iurther, that the persons to whom
milk had been sold in the past could
recover money already paid in.
The state, however, commended there
was no such condition created and
contended that full and complete
immunity from prosecution, criminally
or civilly, had been provided by
the statutes.
Attorney Kearney also contended
that Section 4096 under which the
state was now proceeding in the ex-
aminations did not apply and that only
the second portion Of Section GAG was
open to the state. He added that he
believed the state was pressing the case
too severely at time when the officials
of the state and the producers were
trying to arrive at fair price for milk.
The state contended that there was
no remedy under Section GAG and that
Section 1895, the discovery statute,
T was the only one which applied
to the case at this time.
While President Holt did not person
ally refuse to answer questions put to
2 him at the hearing in Kenosha for rea-
son Of argument and in order to bring
the questions in dispute before the
court for decision, there was stipp-
lation, making it appear that there
had been such a refusal.
} The record sent to Judge Belden by
J Court Commissioner Slater showed
J that Mr.. Holt had been asked the
! following questions:
fare you the president of the Milk
Producers Association with offices at
90 South LaSalle street, Chicagoqo
elbow long have you been such
officer9''
T "Did you as such officer take part
: in proceedings of the said association
I fixing prices to be charged to dealers
} by members of the association on the
J 21st day of Septemberqn
t'Will you produce all books and
papers in your possession or control,
relating to the business of the
association
} The record was made to show that
on advice of Attorney Thos. Ne. Kear-
ney, the witness refused to make reply
and stood mute. Tt was also shown
that the attorney advised him not to
answer either or any Of the questions
} in that the answers would have tend
ency to expose him to penalty or for
in the big tax levy to be collected.
} The finance committee viii begin
} holding its meetings to make up the
budget within the next two weeks. The
report on the tax levy is to be laid
before the council at the first meeting
in December and the annual tax levy
will be formally voted by the council
lat that time.