The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1901-04-23
MEEKER LAW
Chief Justice Depue Renders
the Opinion Upholding
Its Constitutionality.
A HAIRSPLlfTING DOCUMENT
Laymen Will Have Difficulty
in Mastering It's Intrica-
cies Previous Decis-
ions Ignored.
Especial to ..The Jersey city News..l


filed yesterday with the Secretary Of
State. The opinion was written by Chief
Justice Depue. The decision OF the court
was announced in these columns some
time ago, when the details of the bring
ing OF the case before the court were
given.
The opinion of the court is in part as
follows:-
On the argument before the Supreme
Court and in this court the contention
was that the act in question was uncon-
stitutional, on which it was insisted in
this court that the judgment of the Su-
preme Court was erroneous. The main
ground on which this contention rested
was that this act is special and local,
regulating the internal affairs of cities,
in contravention of the Constitution.
AS was said by Chief Justice Beasley
in Van Ripper vs.. sons.-4The purpose
of this constitutional clause was not to
limit legislation, but to forbid only the
doing by special or local laws those things
that can be done by general laws The
provision relates to the methods and not
to the substance of legislation All legis-
lation is based of necessity on a classi-
fication of its subjects, and when such
classification is fairly made, and the leg
islation founded upon it is appropriate
to such classification, such legislation is
as legitimate now as it would have been
prior to the amendments to the Consti-
tuition.
Legislation applicable to all the coun-
ties, or all the cities, or all the borougks,
towns, townships or villages, in this State,
To-,
been mentioned, for the reason that they
are common-law classifications recognized
by the Constitution. The law now in
applicable to all cities of this State.''
a"In re Commissioners of Elizabeth it
was held that for the purposes of legis-
lation cities constitute a class, and a
law applicable to cities only is not in
contrayention of the Constitution. The
legislation under consideration in this
case was the well-known Martin act, the
provisions of which would be equally ap-
propriate to boroughs, towns and town
ships, as we'll as to cities. This case was
recently affirmed in this court. An act
applYing to every county in the State
empowering the Board of Chosen FreehoI-
ders to perform certain duties in relation
to public roads is constitutional. The
principle adjudged in the foregoing cases
is sustained by all the decisions, without
a single dissent
Finally, in Hermann v. Guttenburg, It
was decided by this court that incorpor-
ated cities, boroughs, towns and villages
as well as townships, are recognized by
the Constitution as classes for legislatio
and that laws limited to either of such
classes do not violate the constitutional
prohibition of private, local or special
laws. It was also decided that the courts
cannot inquire whether a municipality is
titular only, and that the classification Of
the Legislature in that regard is conclu-
sve. The decision of this court in this
respect was designed to be decisive on
this subject.
1T will be observed that in all the cases
cited the legislation sustained applied to
some one of the common law classifica
tions, and that the subject matter OF
such legislation would have been as ap-
propriate to other subdivisions as to
those specially embraced in it. Such acts
of the Legislature are in a constitutional
sense general laws
'gThe act now in question requires that
all the officers to be elected at any mu-
nicipal or charter election shall be voted
for and elected on the first Tuesday after
the first Monday of November in eaca
year. The act applies to all cities III
this State.
III the classification in such cases
were statutory, the fact would be de-
cisive if this legislation were based upon
the statutory classification. But it is
not. The classification of cities, towns
townships boroughs and villages is a
classification independent of statutory
prescriptions. 1t rests on the common
law, and it is recognized by the Constitu-
tien of this State. Hence, an act of the
Legislature which applies to any one OF
these political subdivisions is a general
law, not obnoxious to that provision OF
The Constitution which prohibits local or
special laws regulating the internal af-
fairs of cities, etc.
The subdivision of the common law
municipalities into subordinate classes
is a legislative classification, and legisa-
ton with respect to any of such classes
depends upon the appropriateness of such
legislative classification. Classification
acts have been passed dividing cities,
towns, townships, boroughs and villages
into classes on the basis of population
The Office of these classification acts Il
simply to provide rule of construction
for municipal legislation. A statute
framed in compliance with such acts will
be construed accordingly, and upon such
construction the question will arise.
whether the classification adopted is such
in substance as to bring the statute with
in the category of general laws. They
are statutes for interpreting enactments
concerning municipalities. Beyond this
effect, legislation conforming to the sub
divisions is incapable of exercising any
force or controlling effect upon either the
Legislature or the courts. In all such
cases the validity or invalidity of the
statute which is the product of these
classifications depends upon those consid-
erations which will confer upon statute
local and special on its fact the quality
of general law
Nor" continues Justice Depue, sis
this act obnoxious to the constitutional
prescription which provides that sTe
avoid improper influences which may re-
suit from intermixing in one and the
same act such things as have no proper
relation to each other. every law shall