The record-union., 1892-03-16

sion. Ihe supreme Court has held, SAID
Judge Catlin, that the Funded Debt Com
mission Act is valid, because it was en-
acted prior to the adoption of the new
Constitution. That Constitution pro-
hibits such special legislation. But the
commission itself prevailed upon the
Legislature, acting under the new Con-
stitution, to pass an Act amending the
Act creating the commission, so as to per-
NIT it to buy bonds for more than 35 cents
on the dollar.
Without that power the Commissioners
declared that their usefulness was at an
end; it was the sheet anchor of their hope
to make the commission longer useful.
But, clearly, as Judge Beatty and Judge
Blanchard had contended, any such legis-
lation is invalid under the new Constitu-
ton. 1t follows, therefore, that the very
law under which the commission now has
any vigor will be held invalid if any one
brings the question into court.
Judge Catlin therefore held that before
the Supreme Court condemns that Act of
the Legislature, and thus wholly destroys
the usefulness of the commission, it
would be wise to Secure the system by
carrying it into the new charter, which,
under the new Constitution, could be
done without check by the inhibition
against special legislation,
We may add, that on several occasions
not long prior to his death, when Judge
Beatty visited the RECORD UNION Office
to talk over these questions, as he fire.
quently did, his only expressed fear con-
corning the commission was that some
one would raise the question about the
35-cent amendment, which he confessed
stood on shaky ground. and to support
which he had been able to find but one
satisfactory decision, that of Pennsyl-
yania court.
On the 21st day Of January, 1890. Judge
S. Solon Holl published an opinion
taking the same position occupied by
Judge Beatty relative to the then pro-
posed new charter. He held, in brief:
l. The new charter would abrogate the
commission.
2. The new Constitution prevents any
perpetuation of the commission by new
charter, because the Act is part of the
law creating a municipality.
8. The new charter would have to deal
with the city debt, and it is rule that a
new law supplants the old one, when it
covers the same ground.
4. The new charter would abolish the
City Assessor, Board Of Trustees, etc.,
and to recreate them would be to enact a
new law. and that would be special legis-
lation.
8. The Commissioners are trustees for
the city and distinguished as such from
officers of the city. Art XII, Sec. 13 of
the Constitution prohibits the erection of
any new commission to meddle with
municipal affairs. The Legislature can
not delegate to any commission any such
power, nor confer it upon the Mayor or
Common Council.
=. The Legislature must approve or dis
approve the charter. 1t therefore really
adopts it if it approve, and cannot, conse-
quently, by that Act, any more than by
any other, create commission provided
for in the charter.
These are the reasons then, why on one
hand some citizens friendly to the
Funded Debt Commission fear that
adoption of the new charter will destroy
it, and why others hold that not only
will it not do so, but that the express
provision that the charter shall not repeal
the law creating the commission will pre-
serve that agency if the people so vote.
Now, we are of those who, having so
long been the friend of the commission,
are not afraid to commit the question to
the people. If they vote Cor alternative
proposition No. /. submitted by the
Board Of Freeholders, we believe that
the commission will be more safely in
trenched than it now is with the threat
hanging over it that the amendment of
March, 1889, may at any time be over
turned and the usefulness of the COM
mission destroyed by preventing it buy
ing bonds at greater figure than thirty
five cents.
But we also submit-and this and all
else said in this debate must be taken as
exclusive of the question whether the
new charter is strong or a weak one,
and concerning which we have not yet
pronounced-that the Freeholders having
submitted a proposition declaring that
the adoption of the new charter shall not
be taken or construed as repeating the
Act creating the Funded Debt Commits
sion settles the whole matter. If the
people vote "Yes" on that proposition
the charter goes up to the Legislature
with the distinct, emphatic and unmis-
taxable declaration for approval by the
Legislature, that such approval and the
adoption of the charter shall not be con-
strued to be a repeal of the Funded Debt
Commission Act.
How it viii ever be possible for court
or other authority to declare that an Act
distinctly and emphatically declaring
that it does not and shall not repeal, abro-
gate, interfere with or in any way inter
rupt or disturb another law, will work