New-York tribune., 1901-03-01
OTEER L4WMAKIEG.


Ramapo was of the most remarkable per-
formances ever indulged in by a responsible
statesman. On pretence of taking away the
improper privileges of the Ramapo Company
he favored and secured the passage of a char
ter repeal bill. which he has declared to be
possibly unconstitutional and, If so. utterly
worthless TO secure the proposed end. He did
this in preference to supporting a measure
which, in spite of objections. he fully believed
TO be constitutional drafted as to restrict the
coInpanys powers without confiscating any
of its vested property rights.
The bill passed by the Senate may or may
not be unconstitutional. but how can Mr.. Slater
the champion of the anti Ramapo sentiment
explain his support of a bill which he confesses
may be worthless instead of one which he re-
CARDS as sufficient and at the same time con-
stitutional? He says: IF any legislation is
necessary separate from this [repeall act to
-'enable the Ramapo Company TO line with the
powers Of other water companies. that = Is
'for the Ramapo people TO make such sugges-
''tion and offer such legislation" As If the
Ramapo people. supposing the repeal bill TO be
unconstitutional, would not be only too happy
to let the session pass with their opponents
satisfied by void legislation which would leave
the company in complete possession of its i'm
proper powers! II the repeal bill is unconsti-
tutional, subsequent legislation, whether kindly
suggested by Ramapo or by somebody else,
would do good. Al unconstitutional de
struction of a company's rights is not made
constitutional by giving the company some new
rights afterward. 1t will go TO the courts. get
the first law declared invalid. and laugh at
that method of clipping IFS wings
Controller Coler and some others have CON
tinued TO urge this repeal bill. notwithstanding
IT, ,n%f,
that. whatever the Court of Appeals might de-
eide the Republican politicians could say TO
the Democrats: I'VE did exactly what you de-
''manded. and you yourselves are to blame for
1.-The failure to secure relief from Ramapo If
You had not denounced our proposed bin
everything would have been all right" That
is all we'll enough as an example Of the old
political game of ''dshing the Wings" but
what Of the taxpayers Of NewYork City who
want relief from Ramapo regardless of politi-
cal games: 1t will be no satisfaction to them
TO find tnat their lawmakers have left them in
the clutches of Ranapo an incident to throw
ing the responsibility for unconstitutional legis
lation hostile critics. The business of the
Republicans in the Legislature is to take away
the excessive privileges of the Ramapo Com
pany and give New-York City full freedom to
condemn watersheds, and to do this unmis-
IN ACCORDANCE with the OOnStltutlOn-
1t is no service to the people TO pass a bill
OF doubtful validity. We send men TO Albany
because they are supposed to be able to draft
measures that VIII be constitutional If the
modified bill which Mr. Slater favored was not
surely valid, II might have been made so. in
stead of recklessly turning to one still less
likely to pass the scrutiny of the courts The
Idea that this could not have been done, that
valid law cannot be drawn limiting some of
the powers Of corporation and at the same
time confirming 1t in others, is too ridiculous
for words II Is done year after year. The
rule that private bill shall embrace only one
subject never was meant TO forbid dealing with
different phases Of the same subject but to
prevent legislation on one matter under cover
OF legislation on another distinct matter. But
whatever ii means, bill or bills can be drawn
TO conform TO it. and at the same time avoid
the possibility Of unconstitutional confiscation
Nor is Mr.. Slaters excuse that Section of
his bill refers to the general corporation law of
1880 by section and chapter valid one II
such reference Is unconstitutional It is easily