The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1890-09-09
This paper as democratic IN principles
and Is Independent In its vieaos on al
local questions.
Accident or Providence?


The whist players say that there is
''luck under a deuce; but a two-spot
seems to have 'played the deuce" with
every step taken for the amendment
of the State Constitution by the elimi-
nation Of the clause %forbidding special
legislation for cities from it. 1t was
the discovery of the error in the bill
for the submission of the amendment
to popular vote, which has now been
brought to public notice, that
prompted Governor Albeit to hold it
unapproved till the very last minute.
And when he permitted it to become
law at last it was only because-the
duty Of amendment being a purely
legislative function and one with
which he had no official connection
he did not care to take advantage of
his incidental powers to stop the ma
chinery provided for by the constitu.
ton itself.
When the tickets were first sent out
by Secretary of State Kelsey for dis
tribution 1t was assumed that the
error disclosed in them was merely
one Of the types, and that it could be
easily remedied by the printing of
another batch of tickets. 1t is now
found, however, that the fault is not
the printers, MOI yet the Secretary of
States, but goes behind both printer
and Secretary. and disfigures all the
legislation authorizing the submission
of the amendment. The bill recites
the words that are to be wiped out Of
the State Constitution, but it de-
scribes them as being part of Article
W., Section z, Clause 2 of the Con-
stitution, which they are not.
That clause concerns State lotteries
and not special municipal legis-
lation. We notice that Mr.. johnson,
Attorney General ~Stockton's assist
ant, is of the opinion that the error is
manifestly a clerical one-the mistak
ing of the No. II for the numeral II
by the printers and type writers who
handled the bill, and that, as the ex-
press words that are to be eliminated
are recited in the act, the error cor
reefs itself and cannot defeat the cleo
tion. Other lawyers may take the
other view, that a vote amending
clause 2 cannot in any way be consid-
cred as a vote amending clause II, and
that the question has been presented
so maladroitly as to. make it impos-
sible for the people to express them
selves upon it with the clearness, di-
rectness and precision without which
interference with the organic law of
the State should not be permitted.
If the people, when they vote at the
end of the month for or against the
amendment, reject it, there will OF
course be an end of all the complica-
tions. 1t will be as if no attempt had
ever been set on foot to make ii. But
suppose the people should decide to
try to wipe out clause II by wiping
out clause 2, what then? The Legis-
lature will go right to work passing
special laws for cities till, by and by,
some band of cormorants will secure
the passage of one enabling and em-
powering and authorizing them to
waste the substance of q community
somewhere! Then some public-spir-
tied residents of the somewhere will
rise up in their Indignation and
say that steps taken for the
amendment of the Constitution
were irregular; that the Consti-
tuition was not properly amended;
that the amendment permitting spe-
cial laws should not have become a
part of the organic law; and that
therefore the Legislature had no right
to pass the special law in controversy,
by analogy any other special law
whatever. So the matter will get into
the courts.
And the courts-what will they dc
with it? Can they say that the Con-
s~titutlon Is unconstitutional? How
can they declare that some