The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1896-07-08
CITY HALL ACT.
Aldermens Resolution as to
It's Constitutionality
Vetoed.
MAYOR WANsER'S VIEWS
Says That the Proper Way is to
Apply to the Courts to
Review the Act.

Mayor Wanser sent his first veto mes
sage to the Democratic Board of Alder
men last night. Its reception caused q
Stir, as it dealt with q subject the mem
bers in the majority ere Interested in
The message explains itself. This is it:-
herewith return without my approval
the resolution passed by your Board at
your meeting held June SO. 1886, to witt
mott be requested to furnish this Board
Of Chdpfer ssi Of the Laws 81 1885, provid.
the new City Hall Of this city.
While this resolution does not appar-
emily incur any expenditure Of money, it
is hardly fair to Mr.. tfcDermott to re-
quest him to give the matter in question
his time and attention and to expect him
to do this work without compensation.
Chapter 25S OF the Laws of 1895, an act
entitled An act TO establish a law de-
partment in cities of the first class in this
State, to provide fer the appointment and
duties Of the law officers therein and for
their compensation and terms Of Office, =
passed May 16, 1891, defines the duties of
the Corporation Counsel and his relations
to the Boards CT the city as follows
Section 8. The City or Cooperation Coun-
sci shall be the chief law officer OF the
city: he shall provide written opinions
rious Boards and departments of the city
government when required. and be their
a sion TO p their Oh offie euis5at gties a'e etca' e u fsiq +
thus appears thai the proper municipal
authority to furnish your Board with an
opinion such as is contemplated by the
resolution before me is the Corporation
Counsel. AS / understand 1t, your Board
has requested and obtained from that Off
Ger such an opinion, / find no authority
for the employment by your Beard of any
other legal adviser or by any other Board
except the Board OF Finance. While I do
not exactly consider our resolution to
carry with it such an employment and
without intending any ~discourtesy to Mr..
McDermott, / would suggest to your Board
tina the only authority competent to de-
termine the constitutionality of legisla-
ton is the Supreme Court of this State.
Whatever Mr.. McDermott's opinion may
agree with that furnished you by the duly
authorized legal adviser of your Board. it
will not avail for the purpose of the in-
PRODUCER of this resolution. If the Alder
man who is sponsor for the resolution be-
fore me requires legal enlightenment upon
the Corporation Counsel, he can Obtain it
by appealing to the courts, the legally
constituted tribunals for determining
questions of constitutionality of laws. &C.,
which are as open to himfas al Alderman
as they are to any citizen, but he must
do so at his own risk and expense and
not at the expense of any of the public
funds, the power to expend which he APP
pears to be so anxious to obtain.
Very respectfully.
PETER f. WANSER,
There was no discussion. The veto was
laid On the table. 1t is understood that the
Committee on Legislative Enactments
will without consulting the Board ask
Mr.. McDermott to submit to them his
Dickinson and Hough control of the new
mi1nicipa1 building