New-York tribune., 1899-06-20
ANTI-GAMBLING DECISION
NEw-JERSEY'S HIGHEST COURT Up
HOLDS THE AMENDMENT.
DAsHEs THE HOPES OF THE RACETRACK
prOpr = To THE CROrrND

JUSTICE DIXON WRITES THE OPINION. WHICH
DAsHEs THE HOPES OF THE RACETRAcK
PEOPLE TO THE GROUND.
Trenton. June 10 (speciaD.-The Court Of Errors
and Appeals in opinion by Justice Dixon. this
afternoon affirmed the decision OF ne Supreme
Court upholdlng the constitutionaity OF the Anti
Gambling amendment to the Constitution. Such
hopes therefore. the racetrack people cherished
that the courts would ultimately decide against the
amendment dashed 10 the ground, and II there
shall be horseracing In New-Jersey again the
sport will have TO be conducted without book
making and pool-selling features.
In its decision the Court first sweeps away the
contention that 1t has Jurisdiction In the case'
then holds that Bott and the other citizens intst-
ested were legally competent 10 bring the procee1-
h ne up U ,baT the state Board OF Canvassers
return 10 the effect that the vote OF the electors
showed that the amendment had been ADOPTED was
Counsel had maintained that the Boards action
illegal on the ground that the amendment was
nP % ee6Fs nnd e al those who cast
being necessary for adoption JusSee ss eonstiton
Its words are: "A majority OF the electors quail qua
fed 10 vote for members OF the Legislature Young
thereon" and in the following clause i speaks OK
those voting for or against each amendment Evi-
IDENTIFY only those voting for or against an a'e"u
ment are to be deemed those voting thereon. -,
BY the words electors voting there0n eHb az are . NJ
tended the electors who exercise the rignt OF SUI.
frage in such manner that their votes shouu uIe
the law be counted for or against the proposit@on on
submitted, and. although the numOer Ol ndIhSf VI,
the poll lists may represent the number or qualned
electors who attempted 10 vote ana the reJec'&eu gu
ballots NAV all have been official ballots cast oy
OF the qualified electors sun u may pe ca n
not all of those qualified electors voted IN the con-
stutional sense and that the rejected Dahots were
no, votes In the absence OF evidence 10 the CON
trary the presumption Is that the elecNon ohSets
acted rightly and therefore. that the rejected pal
lots were rejected for legal cause ana were NOT
votes for or against any amendment; that all the
votes legally capable Of being counted tor OF asast
the lottery amendment were l4oOoo' ana tuat Sn.s
so many qualified electors voted thereon, OF "hOhi
a ma tOrlty approved and ratified H.
Another objection. urged by counsel for the prose-
cutors was that three amendments, relating 20
different subjects, were on the ballots, ana lne
aone were therefore una Bile TO vote for or against
each amendment separately and distinctly ne
Court differs with counsel. but for another reason
refuses 10 declare the enactment invalid 'Cnoe'
the statute" says the Court. the eiectlon pro. TO
The mart OF any person. and, az far as appears,
every qualified voter who desired 10 exercise ms S
franchise has done In mode satisfactory ~
himself without seeking to vote on some OF NJ NJ
a-endnents while refrainlng from voting on tne
reet so that no right has been denied no VIII com
oa,ert 70 influence the election has been thWarteu,
and the discrepancy between the statute ana t1e
Constitution II there be any. has proved 70 oe ot
no nractical moment Under these clrcumstancess
We think the same public policy which permlttts,o
the prosecutors TO bring UP the SUPPOSED PIDitt ~
grievances now requires US 10 declare tna tlis ~
not such grievance and the theoretlcal oOJsC.Loi
has been waived We find no error IN the 49,. 49,.
rninaton of the Board that the lottery anehuthene
was adopted and consequently the judgment Oh &
supreme Court maintaining II should' OH '"e
grounds above stated. be affirmed