The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1897-08-25

the vote No provision is made as to
whether the issue shall be deemed ap-
proved If accepted by majority OF those
voting at the election. or by majority
of those voting for or against the issue
legislation TO provide for these matters;
there is no general statute on the suplect-
In view of these matters dount II panA-
ers would look upon the bonds with favor.
AS counsel | should advise against pro-
ceeding under this act Of 1885,
/ may add that as to bonds to be issued
to take up an option, as above PROVIDED,
these objections are removed by an act
approved upon the same day. entitled An
Act to submit to popular vote the pur-
chase of supply of pure and wholesome
water in cities of the first class in this
State. laws of 1925, p. I75). Like iesls-
lation as to the other class Of bonds is
issue bonds beyond Sl.000,O0O for a new
water supply TO be constructed by the
city. ,ooz l.s,.s -eo, aon.
tains no general or special repeater, ana
it is grave question as 10 whether !, wl9h- ~
out such repeater. the limitation OF y ovo,-- w.
900 contained in SAID supplement- OF ioh
has been removed.
In conclusion in my opinion the city, in
the present state OF the statute "a law can can
supply upon the provisions Of the con-
tracing act of 1883 tpage S66), under
which several attempts have already been
made, This act has been upheld and ex-
+
planned by our courts.
OF course the ultimate decision in all
these matters rests with your Honor, be-
cause under the Street and Water Act of
1891 (Section %. page 26S) no contract or
agreement for a new water supply can
be entered into without your approval.
'i'N : WILLIAM D. EDWARDS.
The ex-Attorney Generals opinion, CO.
i-,rs7--es 18th that of Mr.. yredenburgh, is
as follows.-
JnREY CITY, August u, 1897. !,
To the Hon. Edward Hoos, Mayor OF
Jersey City, N. j.
/ am in the receipt of your letter under
date of August 5, asking me to advise
YOU whether. in my opinion, Jersey City
aas or has not the right to build its own
water works under the existing statutes,
and in such event, to what extent OF eX-
penditure the city would pc limited. |
you ask and have examined the exist
ing statutes and arrived at the conclu-l
sion that when the provisions OF the
Act of 1876 have been assented to by
the majority OF the legal electors of Jer-
sey City, voting at an election to be held
in said city at a time fixed by the leg
islatiye body of said city with the notlce
and in the manner provided by the 10th
section of the ACT, all the power neces-
sary to build its own water works Will
be vested in the city; and when the ques-
ton of the issue of bonds, # exceed
ing five hundred thousand dollars, has
been submitted to the popular vote in
said city and approved, they may be
issued to the extent that may be nee
essary for the purpose OF procuring ana
maintaining an adequate supply of pure
and wholesome water.
It is an admitted and very old rule in
the construction of statutes that statutes
made. for the public good are to be ex-
pounded SO as to attain their end.
1t is an established rule of law that
all acts in pari materia are to be taken
together as if they were one law and
they are directed to be compared in the
construction of statutes because they are
considered as founded upon one system
and having one object in view; Potter
Wheaton, 3S5; U. S. VS.. Collins, Sd, Blatch-
Sec. 2Ss.)
In other words, in the construction of a
statute the courts will look out of it, to
other statutes in pari materia tor stat
ues of similar import, which may be
regarded as one system In which the con-
stsuction of any separate act may be
aided by the examination OF other pro-
visions of other acts which comprise the
system. Darrell VS.. The State, rs Vroom,
422D
Under the system of general legislation
provided for by the Constitution in New
Jersey, where matters which are really
the subject Of special legislation are ire,
laws, the application of this rule has be-
come necessary to proper understand
An examination of the briefs and opin-
ions in the case of. the Assessors VS.. The
Central Railroad Company, l9 Nroom,
demonstrates this proposition The su-
preme Court of the State held the rail-
road tax act unconstitutional because
they isolated it from other acts belong
ing to the same system and insisted that
the State tax was levied alone on rail
road property. The briefs in the case in
the Court of Errors show that the rail-
road tax act was only portion of the
and hC a
system should be compared and construed
| as if it were but one act, and this view
was adopted by the Court of Errors and
the decision of the Supreme Court re-
versed. On page 241 the Attorney Cen
eral insists that one of the admitted
rules of construction is that all acts in
pari materia are to be taken together;
if divers statutes relate to the same
| thing they ought to be all taken into con-
sideration in constituting any one OF them.
| Go Vroom, p. 249.( On page Ivy, IN JUS
| tice Parker'S opinion, we find the follow
| ing. which was evidently the view of the
majority of the Court
Enough has been said to show the
| power of the Legislature over the sub
| ject of taxation, and to demonstrate that
| in forming judgment as to the val
| idity of a specified act, 1t must be taken
| tive on the same subject Q9 Vroom, p.
| 299).
| 1853 P. L., is entitled "An act to enable
cities of the irst-elass Of this state to
| issue bonds in order to provide and main
| tain a supply of pure and wholesome
| water" 1t provides in the first section
| that such cities for the purpose of pro-
| curing and maintaining an adequate sup
| ply of pure and wholesome water are
| hereby authorized to issue and provide for
| the payment of their bonds to the extent
| that may be necessary for that purpose,
| as provided in the second section of this
| act.''
| The second section provides that no is
| sue of bonds shall be made or the pro-
| ceeds thereof used to pay for the works,
| reservoirs, pipe lines, lands, water and
| water rights for a permanent supply OF
water according to the terms of any OPP
| ply of pure and wholesome water, until
| such purchase, according to the terms of
! the option expressed in said contract has
/ been submitted to popular vote in such
| city, and been approved. provided, that
| the issue of bonds hereunder other than
| that authorized to pay for the purchase
| according to said option expressed in the
! ing five hundred thousand dollars, shall
| not be made until such issue so exceed
| ing five hundred thousand dollars shall
| be submitted to popular vote in such city
| and be, approved.
| The act provides for the issue of bonds
! without limit except that the amount
shall be necessary for the purpose, but it
Arequires, first. the approval of such pur-
4 base according to the terms of the OPP
ti9n BY a popular vote before the bonds
can be issued; second that no other issue
of bonds under the act, over five hum
dre.5 thousand dollars, shall be made un-
fl uch issue has been submitted to a
popui ar vote and approved
This act contemplates two situations,