The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-02-14
Opinion.

tee or seventy known the principle Of proportional
In considering this point first notice
Of the constitution with which may be thought conflict
and finally compare the two SO as to determine
THE plan Of "the Committee Of seyehty" adopts II,
q S Of not only IN
Of sae s0s or
election Of this Board !hs ely divided into ay:
n'a 1s elected IL each
80 q ns Beard #
SS,ss It
for candidate for nine different canddates
may those votes n,n s1i persons the
largest number Of votes shall be declared elected Then there
not voted or and also election Of any person fails
other IN This last the members q the
sons sufficient to make up the full delegation from the dis
general OF i've members The leading features Of the mode
OF election be shown by the Of the Department
Public Works is composed Of hve members of these
the board Of Aldermen within prescribed time. IT might
be more % to say apponed BY the of
shall give nc not Thu than four open ballots, each
y four
sI 20 So b
asS not s"
III have next to refer to the provisions Of the state
nsSos sss ~a sGn a ahf Ky
comforting suffrage the citizen and In atc 49, section
s s Of
TO G far n as
point is concerned SAN city, town and village officers
be e Of By
cd v a% or S s hs %
signate for That purpose"
%oni i should Be- rs%arssd that !his i question
s..s o refer the Ss's :f s q ss
Courts in the of Interpreting f. and 70 snay5s
in ths various forms which assumes wei the
s1s 1Pgsd r. election q he i, r. s
dermen Of the executive oacers Of departments.
be the state affair: before ihs. instrument
az % md II the ~ Of che part
Sn of r.. M there
.Ppsn.%sss ~ sasls sss: ss!sossy
sary enter Its enough that its influence largely
fs,.n the Convention tia. prepared the oons,tuO1 TIE
~ ys'
s' its the to :t. that
S. give
Debates tlas EDS il The committee who
tho
had endeavcred as far possible to strip the Executive OF
should M so' esTsy
OF cut All
IN; thing loose from the These extracts
mode, Of
sisISSs HIM q resolved that he
ssEss
II .ss.,. ~;
appointment q leading local officer, the wal
promptly voted down. In my judgment nothing can be i'm
Il ns
the h1n ID:
OF election or OF counting or OF certifying votes All these
Lss,s!atuIs resort. TO- order to obtain suitable
1e' nss
constitution requires that the officer shall be elected the
SUras n the H.
H. - large district: which are not wsrds de.
out city or large small STR Not word
given By The within city its political sub
There legal decisions which conflict with these posi-
tons As far a. they they are in harmony with What has
secs % wS SSpp s Of
constitutional provision At least has been decided in
By s s9"' .on s'A of e. y.s s Fsss
vs. Blake 40 Barb Any attempt the part Of the Lcsis
Senate or d snySody not havns purely local
unconstitutional and void Cases which this point has
been decided are among others People Board
politan Police AZ Barb b24 affirmed BY the Court of APP
peas Shuster vs. Metropolitan Board of Health, AZ Barb
49,; Dewey Va. The Mayor. S6 N. Y, 449.
The result OF these and other decisions is that the
OF selecting local officers must be vested In authority
having local origin Such local authority may, dis
ceton OF the be either the whole body Of the
electors or the electors IN some DIVISION be- in
case OF appointment an individual or board There
more restriction upon the mode of election than the
mode OF appointment Both absolutely at the discretion
o. the Legislature 49,
The only inquiry which remains this, Docs the plan of
proportional representation"
contemplate an "elecion! Would the aldermen chosen
under be elected by the electors of the city of New
or of some division thereof w II be election ALL Is
GEAR case or election by division OF the city The Sem
ate district is political division within the city limits The
language OF the proposed charter only employed
venient mode of designating existing city DIVISION
aldermanc district bv provision does change
though the Senate district soud be hereafter altered II Is
therefore clear case OF "city DIVISION, and comes within
the intent OF tue CONSTITUTIONAL provision as previously
Before directly considering the constitutional question