The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1889-04-09
GROUNDS FOR FIGHT.

O'Neill's Right to Issue the Proclama-
tion-Was the Mayor "Absent''?
The motive of the Board Of Finance in
making the changes was not wholly to
keep the legal lights Mayor Cleveland
may select out of office, but also to get
things in readiness for a big tug in the
courts against the new act The removals
and appointments are practical
declaration by the Board of Finance
and their appointees, who control the
funds in the City Treasury, that they do
not intend to surrender to the officers
cf the new government unless the
courts bid them to. Three modes of pro-
cedure are open to the contestants. In
the first place a certiorari may be applied
for; then quo warranto is possible, and,
thirdly, an injunction against the Mayor
is within reach. To which method of pro
cedure recourse may be had no one is able
just now to foresee. The choice Will
largely depend upon the exigencies of the
situation.
GROUNDS OF CHARTER CONTEST.
The grounds of contest are as numerous
as the methods of contest, if they are not
indeed more numerous The local option
feature of the bill, under which the people
are voting on it today, is claimed to be un-
constitutional That is sure to be one
ground for the fight. The question, as
has already been stated in these columns,
is a close and interesting one.
A second point against the bill relates
to the issuance of the proclamation, in
pursuance of which the vote is being
taken today. This bore the signature, not
of Mayor Cleveland, but of Assemblyman
O'Neil, as President of the Board of
Aldermen. Mayor Cleveland was absent
from town at the time it became at once
possible and necessary to issue the notice @
OF the election, and Mr.. O'Neill signed the
proclamation as Acting Mayor
The new charter provides that it may be
submitted to a vote of the people on a
resolution of the Council or on the pro-
clamation of the Mayor. 1t makes no pro
vision for action in the absence of the
Mayor, and, therefore, it is claimed, con-
ferred authority to act only on Mayor
Cleveland.
The old city charter authorizes the
President of the Board of Aldermen to act
in the absence or disability of the Mayor,
but the new act is not an amend
ment or supplement to rhe
deficiencies or shortcomings cannot be
supplemented by any provisions in the old
charter So at any rate, it is claimed, and
therefore it is urged Alderman O'Neip
was entirely without authority to act.
WAS THE MAYOR ABSENT
Even if he had authority to act in the
absence of the Mayor, was the Mayor lab
sent' from the city within the legal def
milton of the term? 1t has never, it is said,
been satisfactorily determined what con-
stitutes an official absence" within the
meaning of the law, and some lawyers
urge that notice by the Mayor of the
temporary abdication of his functions, is
necessary to create an absence that the
law will recognize.
A third objection made to the act is
even more technical. The bill provides
that it shall not be operative till it shall
have been accepted by the people. Their
ratification makes it law. I'LL it is so
ratified, where is the law under which
either Mayor Cleveland or Alderman
O'Neill, or any one else could issue pro
clamation The question thus raised is
paradoxical, but it is looked upon by some
of the enemies of the charter as very
serious one.
POLITICAL EFFECTS.
The current speculation of the streets is
that the prospect of the Board of Finance
making fight must tend to dispirit the
new charter advocates, while it will on
the other side strengthen the hands of
those seeking places under the old char
ter, who may be presumed to be unfavora-
BILE to the new But then, as measurable
offset, it is declared that many people who
might have remained inactive will be
spurred, by disapproval of the action of
the Board of Finance, into vigorous and
effective support of the bill that Gusts the
Board from office.