The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1923-03-29
SYMMONDS DOES !.
NOT WANT STAY
Contestant for Office Asks
to Go Right On With
the Trial.
BARNETT TO APPEAL.
Judge Belden VIII Rule Mon
day on Issue Of whether
Trial Is Postponed.

More words flew in circuit court
Friday afternoon in the already wor-
dy contest for the title of district
attorney, as the defense in the ac-
tion, Morris Barnett and his attor-
ney asked for stay of proceedings
and was opposed in their request by
Frank 5. Symmonds.
Mr.. Symmonds held that "a hours
or at most two or three days ought
to be sufficient time in which to
file an answer to- his complaint and
that the court ought not to grant a
stay while Barnett perfected the APP
peal to the supreme court.
The matter was argued in a hear
ing wldch began Friday afternoon il
judges chambers and later adjourned
tor the courtroom and when the ar
guments were all in, Judge Belden
said that he would be ready with his
decision either sometime today or
Monday.
Attacks Barnett's Work.
Frank Symmonds did not confine
himself entirely to the points in ar
gument and went afield to criticize the
work of the present holder of the
title, Morris Barnet, in performing
the work of the office of district
attorney.
"The county. of Kenosha," volun-
teered Symmonds in his remarks to
the judge at the hearing, "is today
much in need OLA district attorney
who will properly advise the county
board"
OF all the remarks made, this alone
seemed to nettle District Attorney
Barnett, though he passed it off in
jest and show of good humor.
"At least the county board has new
er had to turn us out of the room,"
he vouchsafed with shrug and
smile.
Roders Said 'No kick.
Nicholas Roders chairman of the
county board was questioned follow
ing the tilt as to whether the body
he represented had any criticism
against Mr.. Barnett.
: "None whatsoever" declared Chair
man Roders, somewhat surprised at
the question. "There has been\ no
trouble, we have absolutely no critic
ism, and in fact are very we'll pleased
with his services"
Another pointed out that there had
been some criticism not of Mr.. Bar
nett but of Mr.. Symmonds, who while
prosecutor had drawn up the contract
between the city and county for the
>exchange of sites for the new court
house, and had made the contract to
read that the, city should clear the
new courthouse site on Market street
within a reasonable time
This phrase REASONABLE time" might
be variously- construed and had no
bite to it. it was said, SO that the
county board had nothing definite to
go upon in formulating a grievance
if the site were not entirely cleared
when they needed it.
.r, Claims Office of Prosecutor.
Frank s. Symmonds again made clear
that he held that he was prosecutor Of
Kenosha county in right, but stated
that he did not so hold, either now or
in his complaint in quo warranto on
the grounds that he had been elected.
He said that he was district attorney
because the election was void, and he
believed the court would find that it
would have to declare the election
void, and that he was district attor-
NV i1st1 IF he .srnL+ - &C
GER to hold over under such circum-
stances until the next election.
Calvin Stewart in asking for a stay
of proceedings insisted that the de-
Tense was entitled to some time.
Don't think that we have put in a
demurrer for nothing" said Stewart
"Mr. Symmonds has been doing moth
ing for the last three months but dig
ging up election cases. Mr.. Barnett
has been busy as prosecutor and
have been busy with my private prac-
tice, and we have to have a,little time
in which to perfect an appeal"
Symmonds: "And I am in the posi-
tion where | am denied the right to
practice under my contention of being
district attorney, and have been three
months without salary. The sta
tutes gives them twenty days in which
to file an answer to complaint and
those twenty days have long since gone
by. | am not criticizing this court
in taking two weeks to deliberate on
this question for | know how occupied
your Honor has been. And now am
willing to grant them twenty four
hours or few days but not more, be-
cause they are not entitled to it."
Judge: 'You admit, Mr.. Symmonds.
that Mr.. Barnett has right to appeal
from an order ruling demurrer, that
an order overriding demurrer is an
appealable order?"
Symmonds: ooh, yes, l do"
Judge: But what then would be
the use OF an appeal from a demurrer
if the defendant were requested 20
proceed to trial on the merits ~
Stewart: Exactly: No use. Sup
pose this court went ahead with the
trial, and it was decided that Bar
nett had usurped the office and were
not district attorney, and then the
supreme court ruled on the demurrer
and held that Mr.. Symmonds had no
right to come into court at all ?"
Judge: Il do not think / need to
hear further argument on this point
this afternoon. Decision will be given
in day or two"