The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1901-03-09

J of municipalities. The discretion that en-
ters into the decision of the question
whether particular law is general or
local or special is that, where the classi-
| fication appears to rest on substantial
grounds, that the line of demarcation
which separates the places included from
those excluded is a matter of judgment,
the resolution of the Legislature will pre-
vail unless 1t plainly appears that such
classification is an invasion of the Con-
stitution.
'.The office of the Classification act OF
1882 Gen. Stat, D. 45S), by which cities
We're divided into the classes on the basis
of population, is to provide rule of
construction for the convenience of muni-
cipal legislation.
Such classification cannot be made
the means of evading the constitutional
interdict of local or special laws.
whether any particular statute is To-
cal or special must be determined not
upon its compliance with the legislative
classification, but upon whether, having
regard to the character of the legisla-
tion and the limitation upon it contained
in the act, the statute is or is not gem
eral law as defined by the courts.
"A classification on the basis of popu-
lation in statutes relating to the struc-
ture. machinery and powers of municipal
government is legitimate where the popu-
lation bears a reasonable relation to the
necessities and proprieties of the various
grades of municipal government, and
classification in such cases being COM
mitted to the judgment of the Legisla-
ture the Legislature judgment will pre-
vail unless the classification be plainly
illusory or applied illusively.
when law is in terms local, salts
factory reasons must be found to exclude
it from the constitutional interdict of To-
cal laws.
1.-The act of March IS, 1897, entitled An
act relating to cities of the first class of
this State, and providing for the holding
of municipal or charter elections therein
and regulating the terms of elective and
appointive officers therein, (Pamph. L., y.
49, which provides that all municipal Of
fiicers in cities of the first class shall be
elected in each year on the first Tuesday
after the first Monday in November,
which is the day fixed for the annual cleo
tion of State and county officers, and
upon the same official ballots required
by law for the election of State and coun-
ty officers, relates neither to the struc-
ture nor to the machinery nor to the
mowers of municipal government.
Population is not legitimate basis of
classification for the purposes of this act,
and no substantial grounds appearing for
discriminating between cities of the class
designated in the act and other municipal
tiles with respect to such legislation, the
act is local and special, and therefore
within the constitutional interdict of local
or special laws"
The decision of the court was written
and delivered by the present Chief JUS
tice Depue, and was concurred in by the
then Chief Justice Magic. now Chancel-
lor. and Justices Lippincott, Van Syckle.
Adams, Bogert, Collins and Ludlow dis
sented, the two former writing opinions
in support of their contentious.
The gist of the decision is embraced in
the following
From the earliest period in the his
tory of this State it has been the policy
to keep the election of township, town
and city officers separate from the cleo
ton of State and county officers.
''This policy is forcibly expressed in an
act of the Legislature passed in 1889 (Ger
Stat. p. 1,33D, which, in its preamble re-
cited, Whereas, it is deemed for the best
interest of municipal government that
elections for local officers should not be
held on general election days and enact
ed that no local or charter election shall
be held in this State on the same day
fixed for the holding of general election
or on the day when members, of the gem
eraI assembly are now elected by law
eat the time this act was passed no
enc of the cities, towns boroughs and
townships held its local election coinci-
dent with the State and county elections.
The act changes the day for municipal
elections in the two cities and combines
the election for local officers with ths
election for State and county officers.
The issue presented by this record is
whether, having regard to the subject
matter of this legislation, cities having
a population exceeding 100000 have, by
reason of population, characteristics dis
tinguishing them from cities with pop
ulation of less than 100000, which would
make such legislation appropriate to
cities having less population. In solv-
ing this issue it must be borne in mind
that this act, as already observed, in no
sense relates either to the machinery or
the powers, OF lH6 SlIuctuTe VI CITY guy
ernment.
"On what course of reasoning can sub
stantial grounds be found for discriminat-
ing between the cities of the one class
and other cities, towns, townships and
localities in the matter of holding local
elections at the same time, and combined
with elections for State and county Off
GERS?
What characteristics are inherent in
the population or affairs of the two cities
embraced in the act distinguishing them
from other cities-Hoboken, Paterson,
Elizabeth, Trenton and Camden, cities of
large population--which render elec-
ton for local officers, combined with an
election for county and State officers, ap-
propriate to the one class and inappro-
pirate to the other, OF such magnitude
and Importance as will justify the in
clusion of the one class and the exclu-
sion of the other from this scheme of
legislation? The act being local on it's
face, just grounds for such discrimina-
tion must be found in it's subject matter
to relieve it from constitutional inter-
Diet
In dealing with other arguments offered
by the lawyers in the case the Court
said
with respect to the other reasons as
signed as grounds for the discrimination
created by this act, such as the expense
! - II s.-4- e.