The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1897-06-21

IN April and became Mayor of Jersey
CITY at the first second of the first Mon
Say tiap N N May. IT. therefore. the third sec
tion OF the act is sustained and the first
I rejected, it will extend the term of the
incumbent until January 1899 However
20 comment further upon the divisibility
OF TINS act would be at the cost of serious
ness. This statute is not sustained by a
single decision interpreting the consti-
| tuuonai provision TO which it is alleged
.,Ihe only mpracticability of extending
the provisions of this act to all cities was
FOUND IN the fact that it could not be
By eleven Sotes II E had ths aested sen
| camden, Trenton, Elizabeth RahWay.
| New brunswick. Paterson and all otner
! the Legislature.
Jersey City and Paterson are divided
lnto WARDS, and these wards into voting
ing precincts, in which there were cast.
at the last November election 16 OIL votes
II II the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and
| thirty precincts. Adding the first three
| from the Ninth ward we have the same
number as in Paterson. At these thirty
vember last, II, 16l. or 1850 votes less than
IN the city of Paterson. Jersey City and
paterson have always held their municI-
PAL elections on the second Tuesday in
April What quality or situation is pre-
sented by these thirty-three precincts in
Jersey city that entities them to have
aid state elections, and will justify the
Mitnnolaing OF the benefits Of this law
from the city of Paterson?
In tie argument In Hoos " O'Donneu
!! was Claimed that there were three dis
ing aguIsning characteristics by which
voter Of a city of the Iirst-class could
posed 1t was asserted by MIR. Riker. to
eontaminate his fingers with base
bripes. i This may be. true in Newark,
but as it is not true in Jersey City. it
VIII not support the inclusion of the lat
ter. town in the attempted classification.
II, II y ls, Is true IN Newark: why consolidate
Before deciding this act constitutional on
this ground, the Court should insist upon
statistics Secondly, it was contended
glect municipal elections This is not
shown by election returns, but If it could
against this BILL The citizen who votes
only at National elections cares nothing
about State and municipal affairs, while
have studied his duty. Both of these
classes would have voted party tickets
nees for local offices. Thirdly, it was
argued that If officers in cities of the
ilrst-class took their offices in January
mencement of the fiscal year in such
cities. Why, then. were the terms Of
officers not made to commence with the
It is urged that consolidation of cleo
t1ons will save expense to cities of the
first class But the expense of elections
Is, IN All cities about so much per capita.
municipalities are divided into voting dis
tricts, each to contain not more than six
hundred voters. The same number of
officers and ballots will be found neces-
sary for each thousand voters in Tren-
ton as are required in Jersey City. But
why should large cities be relieved, while
the double load is continued on the small
municipal camels?
Under the next census Paterson will be-
come a city of the first class Will the
consolidation of elections then have "a
natural relation to that city? Ingenuity
cannot from an affirmative answer.
All cities in New Jersey elect their muni-
cipal officers at elections held separate
from State elections.
The act of 1897 does not deal with the
machinery of government 1t does not
give, add, or subtract powers, except as
1t incidentally extends officials terms. Its
sole object is to provide that the local
elections in Newark and Jersey City shall
be held under certain Influences which,
by the declared policy Of the State should
not beailowed to affect municipal cleo
tions.
# this legislation is supportable, what
objection could be found to a consolida-
ton of elections in cities of the first class
having more than two-thirds of the en-
tire population of the county? This would
exclude Jersey City; or in cities of the
first class which have gained or shall
gain more than twenty per cent. in popu-
lation between the taking of censuses.
This would exclude Newark.
How municipalities shall be governed is
the principal inquiry of legislators Form
erly it was answered by the representa-
tives of each municipality, whose deter
mination guiced their legislative associ-
ates. Now, the question OF imposing the
evils the constitutional amendments were
to prevent is left to those who
represent the various classifcations. If
Newark and Jersey City unite on legis-
the representatives of either Newark or
Jersey City are in sympathy with
the political majority. one must
suffer from any unwise legislation
desired by those who manage affairs in
the other. Jersey City has four members |
of the Board of Street and Water Com
wanted five, and it being plain that 1t
would be unconstitutional to have five in |
one city of the first class and four in |
another jersey city must add to her
been. that where one city of the first |
class would probably have escaped in |
jury under special legislation, two must |
now be Joined in the law. In cities of |
the second class, eight are affected, often |
at the desire of the representatives of |
one or two who are in sympathy with the |
would have been well for our cities if the |
plan of classification had remained undis- |
covered; but now that 1T Is established, / |
submit that there does not exist good |
reason for sustaining the use of an ar |
bitrary and irrelevant classification in |
debasing the municipal governments of |
Newark and Jersey City. The question |
is not one of the structure of municipal |
government nor of municipal machinery, |,
but whether, in cities having population I
so large that issues of State and national |
policy are vigorously discussed on every |
corner municipal officers shall be chosen |
on issues that have nothing to do with
government
In the legislation before the court. |
there is not any attempt to provide ma |
chinery for electors in cities of the first |
class different from that used in other |
cities Voters are to be registered. |
nominations must be certified and ballots |
must be official. The proposed differen- |
tiation is not one of form-it is not sought |
TO provide a novel system of government |
for cities of the first class 1t is pro- |
posed to differentiate these cities on a |
question of public policy that has been |
discussed by every writer on American
politics, and upon the elective system |
elsewhere. One form of government |
may be adapted to very large cities. and I
to smaller divisions huf
there cannot exist in one class of cities a /
reason for nor an objection to the console |
dation of municipal and National and |
State elections which does not exist III, I
every class. The object of this bill IS |
to tie questions of municipal government |
to State and National kites. If this IS /
good work, why deprive cities of the other
classes of the benefits? If the object ;s /