The Jersey City news., 1901-11-20
STOKES LAW
AGAIN.
Attorney General Grey Ap-
plies to Court Of En-
rors for a Rehearing.
REASONS FOR THE REQUEST
Asks Court to Specify the
Sections That Are
Constitutional.

I TRENTON, Nov. 20, 1901.-In the peti
ton which Attorney General Gray pres
ented to the Court of Errors and Appeal:
4 yesterday for a rehearing of the argu
ment of the suits to declare unconstitu
tional the Stokes school law, he gave
twelve reasons for a rehearing, the frs
three being as follows:
THAT the Court has reached the con
clusion that the act entitled An ac tt
establish system of public instruction
is unconstitutional for the reason thai
Articles VI. and VII, sections 45 to lo6
inclusive, contains provisions which are
/ not consistent with the constitution.
! That the entire, act is not unconsti-
4 tutional for the reasons stated in the
i opinion of the Court and which are ap-
4 plicable only to the sections above men
toned.
THAT the declaration of the unconsti-
| tutionality of the entire act leaves the
State without any uniform system OF
| public instruction
! The next point made in the petition
is that in view of the opinion of the
/ Court that. the Stokes act is unconstitu-
tional there is no legally organized State
Board of Education.
passage. Of the act of 1900. the State Board
bers, two of whom were appointed from
each Congressional district, each of
whom was required to be a member of a
different political party.
By the supplement to the act of 1900,
passed last winter. the Stokes act was
| so amended as to make the Board of
4
each of the ten Congressional districts,
and the terms of office of the then mem
bers of the Board was terminated.
The petition sets out that should the
act stand there would be no legally con-
| stituted Board of Trustees of the Colored
Industrial School at Bordentown. The
control of this school was vested by the
| Stokes act in the State Board of Educa-
| ton and the offices of the members of
the Board of Trustees, except the ex-
officio Officers have all expired.
| But probably the greatest confusion as
pointed out in the Attorney-Generalss pc
tition would obtain in the case of the
| school tax.
] The declaration that the act of 1900 is
| unconstitutional destroys all the amend
ments to that act, including chapter 11s
1 of the laws of 1901.
This amenda tory legislation affected rne
| apportionment of the school fund, which
| was thereby placed upon the basis Of at
| tendance instead of the former plan of a
4! school census comprehending all children
| of a school age regardless of the ques-
ton whether they did or did not attend
| public schools.
I'm view of this amendatory legisla-
! tion,n argued the Attorney General, mo
| steps were taken to ascertain the num-
| ber of children of school age and there
| fore there is no such basis for apportion-
| ment of school moneys as that required
| by legislation before the passage of the
act of 1900 80 that there is now no method
| of making any apportionment whatever.
"Under the provisions of the law prior
| to the revision of 1907 continues the
petition, 1.-THE county superintendent OF
schools was paid by the county out of a
| fund provided for that purpose by taxa
| tion. No taxes have been levied to pro-
vide this money since the passage of the
revision of 1900, under the provisions of
/ which latter act the yearly salary of the
| county superintendent is paid from the
| treasury of the State, out of the income
| of the school fund, upon the warrant of
| the comptroller, 30 that in view of the
| opinion of the court that the act of 1900
! is unconstitutional, there is not only no
/ fund to meet these necessary expenses,
but there is no provision of law under
| which fund can be presently provided
| for that purpose"
This view of the case may lead to come
embarra assment for county superintend-
ents unless the court sees its way clear
/ to reconsider it's decision.
The petition then makes the statement
! that there are many sections of the
Stokes act in no way affected by the
sections set aside, and that for that
reason that portion of the law which is
not open to criticism on constitutional
grounds should be retained
The Attorney General in his opinion
1 then argues at some length that the act
+ should not be set aside because it pro-
yides not for the management and con-
troll of a system of schools already ex-
isting, but for the creation Of a new sys-
! TEN.
BY the constitution power is conferred
upon the Legislature to establish a sys-
tenn of free public schools in the following
mandatory terms: The Legislature shall
provide for the maintenance and support
of a thorough and efficient system of
free public schools for the instruction of
all the children in this State between
the ages of five and eighteen years"
.It is quite clear argued the Attorney
General, ssthat if the Legislature derives
this power from the constitutional the
provisions of the constitution are, as it
is is respectfully submitted they are,
mandatory. and If the power conferred by