The Waterbury Democrat., 1935-06-22


 order.
 It is under the latter point that MT. Lewis brings his application for execution. He points out in his petition that if the supreme court uphoids Judge Peasley's ous- ter decision, then a serious ques. tion as to the validity of the acts of the two named registrars in the fall elections, should they be allowed Ito remain in office, would arise.
 The application states that be- cause of the nature of the original quo warranto proceedings, the case partakes of a criminal action. The application asks for immediate re- moval of the registrars, or in lieu thereof, that they be held in con- tempt of court.
 The application.
 The application filed yesterday, reads:
 MOTION FOR EXECUTION OR, IN LIEU THEREON, PUNISH
 MENT FOR CONTEMPT.
 The relator respectfully repre- sents that the due administration of justice requires that execution issue forthwith, and as reason therefore, assigns the following:
 Because even though the re- spondents appeal from the judg- ment of this court to the supreme court of errors, said appeal can not be decided until late m the fall, probably not earlier than the latter part of November, and in the meantime, in accordance with the charter of the city, the city election will be held in October, at which election, new registrars of voters will be elected by the people to take office on Jan. l, 1936, and consequently, in the. event that said respondents per- of registrars pending the appeal, all of their acts as such purported officials must, of necessity, be Illegal, in the event that the judg- mnt of this court is upheld upon appeal, and, therefore, serio Il s questions of legality may arise in connection with the forthcoming city election;
 Because if, in the exercise of It's discretion, in accordance with the provisions of Section 366 of the Connecticut Practice Book, this court orders that execution issue, all of the acts of the registrars entitled to hold office under the daatotn,a AR thta aAuwk xuauiA t,, any event, be valid and legal be. cause of the fact that said regis trars are at present, irrespective of the decision of the court, duly appointed deputy registrars, in ac- cordance with the law, and con. sequently their acts would be valid either as registrars or as deputies, whatever might be the final de- cision upon appeal, and, there- fore, the interests of justice re. quire that execution issue;
 And because this proceeding be- ing an action in the nature of quo warranto, in accordance with the provisions of the statutes of this state, 1t partakes of the nature of a criminal action, and requires uHucT tHS CVultHoH iaW SHS tu- position of penalty. The action, therefore, Is punitive in nature and effect, and In order to preserve status quo pending appeal to the supreme court, 1t is necessary that the respondents obtain stay of execution. No such motion has been interposed, and in the mean time, said respondents arc act ually physically occupying the off, ces of registrars and claiming the rights, priveleges and emoluments attached to said offices.
 Therefore, the relator respect fully moves that execution issue, or, in lieu thereof, that the re- spondents be declared in contempt of court.