The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1899-03-14
GAMBLING CASE.
Now Being Heard Before
the Court Of Errors
and Appeals.
Mr.. M'DERMOTT ARGUED
Contends Amendment Should
Be Set Aside ~ Attorney
General Grey For the State.
Especial to ...rhe Jersey city News.pl

TRENTON, March IA, lS99.-The Court
Of Errors and Appeals devoted all its
time yesterday to hearing argument in
the suit brought to AVE the constitu-
tionaI amendment prohibiting gambling
set aside as not properly adopted by the
people. The nominal prosecutor in the
suit is Charles Bott, of Hudson county,
and the suit is brought against Secretary
of State George Wurts in the form of a
certiorari. The Supreme Court decided
against the opponents of the amendment
and a writ of error was taken out carry
the proceeding to the higher court for
review.
The entire morning yesterday was
consumed in reading the printed case
and the Supreme Courts opinion, which
was lone by ex-senator William d. Ed
wards, of counse for the prosecutors.
When this had been don the Court was
asked to allow an extension of time for
argument on account of the Importance
of the question involved. The request
was granted and it was decided to allow
each side two hours.
The argument was opened by Senator
Allan MoDermott for the prosecutor. VINO
made al elaborate argument against al
lowing the amendment to stand on the
statute books of the State. Mr.. McDer-
motifs chief point was that the election
law under which the special election was
held on September 26, 1851, was unconsti-
tutional, because it did not provide for
carrying on the election in the manner
prescribed by the Constitution. There
were three amendments voted on at that
election and Mr.. McDermott held that the
form of ballots should have been such as
- A. x.+. -. 49, ~
amendments without voting on all.
article TX. of our State Constitution
said Mr.. McDermott, provides that If
more than one amendment shall be sub
mitted they shall be submitted in such
manner and form that the people may
vote for or against each amendment Sc
parately and distinctly There were three
amendments submitted by the act of 1897,
and it was enacted:-O That they should
be printed upon one official BALLOT %
that each of said ballots should be count
ed for each proposition thereon not cam
celed with ink or pencil, and against each
proposition so cancelled 60 that no ballot
should be used or counted at such election
except such official ballot
st will be seen that the law compelled
every voter who desired to vote for or
against any proposed amendment to also
vote for or against the other two PROPOSE
tons. The Constitution does not empower
the Legislature to attach any such coEdi-
tion to the casting of a vote for or against
a proposed amendment. The statute can
not say to the voter, You shall not vote
for or against any amendment unless you
vote for or against ALL
IAN honest citizen may frankly say, I
do not know whether the amendment is
an improvement, and I cannot vote intelli-
gently He may ask to be excused. He
may say, This amendment affects me in
a degree greater thar it does my fellow
citizens, and while I desire its adoption,
I do not wish to vote for it." A voter
may nave conscientious reasons for re-
framing from voting upon a proposed
amendment. Suppose than an amendment
should be proposed providing that divorce
shall be granted for desertion when such
desertion shall nave continued not less
than three years
ssThere are thousand of electors In
New Jersey who would say, MY con-
science will not allow me to vote for or
against that amendment. I do not be-
lieve that divorce should be granted at all.
If ] vote against this amendment l vote
to make divorce easy. If l vote for it, ]
take from the Legislature the power TO
prohibit divorce
Amy voter may desire to vote upon
one amendment and not upon another
He may nave studied one and not the
other. He may say, ! believe that
whether the Governor should be de-
prived of the right to renominate one
who has been. rejected by the Senate.
Can the Legislature say to this citizen,
You cannot exercise your intelligent
judgment On the proposition you have
studied and understand unless you give
a guess upon all the others?
Let WI amendatory propositions be
submitted to the people, the first to
give equity power to the law courts.
the second to provide that all property
shall be taxed by uniform rules and ac-
cording to value. Could not a citizen
say. I cannot vote inteIligently on the
first proposition. / am not willing to
vote for it because it may work harm to
those who have litigation. and I am UNI
willing to vote against It because my.
single vote may work great harm. ! do
understand the other proposition and
desire to vote for the amendment Can
the Legislature say to this man, You
must record your ignorance as well as
your knOWledge2'
.sIhe constitutional privilege is to vote
for or against eacfl-not to vote for or
ton is of such amendment or amend
ments, or any of them, by. a majority
fure has change this. Section 1 of the
act of 1897 provides hat every ballot
shall be counted for or against every
AH6Hum6flt proposed. IL pTURlQGS lldt
no elector shall vote for or against any
amendment separately, and that each
elector shall vote for or against every
amendment submitted.
THE right given by the Constitution is
not to vote for or against every amend
memt separately and distinctly, but for or
against any. II the Legislature can say
that / must vote for or against every
amendment proposed, then ! cannot vote
for or against any separately. Every cleo
tor Is entitled to say, as to each or all
of the proposed amendments I have not
sufficient Information to guide me-. / am
In doubt; / do not know, and to refrain
from voting for or against any or all.
AS to each amendment he Is entitled TO
say, I am willing to abide by the action
of a majority of the electors qualified 10
vote for members OF the Legislature yot-
ing thereon"
At the conclusion of Mr.. McDermott's
argument, Attorney General Grey opened
the case for the State, but had only made
a part of his argument when court adj
journed for the day He will conclude this
morning when former Attorney General
John p. Stockton will close for the prose-
cutor's side.
Mr.. Grey held that the court, In con-
sidering the question, cannot go behind
the returns or exercise any other power
than that with which the Board of Cam
vassers was invested. The court cannot
become a new tribunal to xanine into
the question as to how people voted,
how votes were cast, what the Intention
of the voter WaS-whether the ballots
were regular or Observation-Disclosures IT'S