The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1902-08-09

dicates that its object is to legislate re-
specting all of certain classified things,
then if the legislation in the body Of the
act is confined to only part of such
things, the act is unconstitutional because
of the falsity and deception Of its title.
and the act in that case was likewise held
unconstitutional"
Our courts has repeatedly held that the
Legislature has no right to pass acts ap-
plying to cities of certain class then
in being, but must legislate as to all
cities of the class then in being or there
after coming into being
Applying the rules above laid down to
the present law we find that while the
act refers to all cities of the first class
in this State, whether in being or to
come into being, it is limited in its OPP
Grafton to cities possessing City Hospi-
tai which may become unsanitary, im-
proper OF inadequate, making the appli-
cation of the act narrower than that ex-
pressed in the title, rendering it false and
deceptive
INV ALlD <A1AlN.
The act also violates the same clause
of the Constitution in the following man
ner:By the title of the act the purpose
is declared to be to authorize, first. rities
erect hospital buildings thereon; second,
to issue and sell bonds to pay for the
same; third, to create a Board of Off
cials to have charge of the same.
A reading of this act indicates that the
Board of Officials there created is a
special commission. to acquire the lands
and erect the building; and upon this
being done, their duties will cease. There
is nothing in the title of the act which
expresses an intent to take the manage
ment and control of the-old hospital. or
the new hospital when erected, out CT
the management and control of the Off
ciaIs designated by law for the purpose.
In other words, not intention is evinced
to change the organic law as to manage
ment and control.
But if we give to the title the broad
est possible Interpretation, and say that
the authority of the officials is further
extended to the management and control
of the hospital, such right as expressed
in the title only arises on the completion
of the hospital which the commission is
to erect. There is nothing in the title of
the act which indicates an intent to give
to such officials, when appointed, immed-
late control of the old hospital and to
oust the present city officials having con-
troll of the same.
If the intent is sufficiently clear in
the title to cover the partof the act
which gives the Board of Trustees con-
troll of the new building when erected,
it is manifestly clear that nothing in the
title shows an intent to give the Trus-
tees any authority over the old hospital
building and property and to oust the
present officials of their functions and
duties. Therefore, when the Legislature
by section five of said act provided that
the Board of Trustees when so appoint
ed, should have general charge and CON
troll of all city hospitals in any such city
from the time of their appointment. it
legislated on objects not expressed in the
title. and renders the act unconstitution-
al, for the reasons given by the Court of
Errors in the cases of the City of Bev-
erly against VAIN and the Asbury Park
case above referred to.
SPECIAL LEGISLATION.
20 The act regulates the internal af-
fairs of cities. in this State, is special,
and violates Article 4, Section Z, Para
graph II of the Constitution, which for
bids the passage of special laws regulat-
ing the internal affairs of cities, and
provides that only general laws shall be
passed for such purpose
That this Act regulates the internal
affairs of cities cannot be denied. 1t
authorizes the appointment of board
of trustees for the erection of hospital
buildings. If the act applied to all
cities of the first class now in being and
hereafter coming into being, in a general
possibly would be constitutional because
it might be said that the Legislature had
a right to legislate for cities of the first
class with respect to the subject matter
of this act
That the Legislature has power to
classify cities and other municipalities
for the purpose of legislation is unques-
toned But the classification must be
natural and reasonable and not artificial,
arbitrary or illusory.
In the case of the Board of Educa-
ton of Jersey City VS.. Lewis, 90 Att,
BAG. the act in question was the recent
school law, and the Legislature enacted
one system with respect to municipali-
ties divided into wards, and another for
those not so divided. The Court of Err
rors held the act unconstitutional because
the classification of municipalities as be-
ing divided into wards or not being so
divided was purely arbitrary and not bas-
ed on any condition requiring different
methods of management.
This is one of the latest decisions of
the Court of Errors on the subject and
contains a review of the history of the
law on the subject.
NOT FOR ALL CITIES.
A reading of this act shows that it is
not made applicable to first class cities.
but only to first class cities having a city
hospital which shall be deemed to be I'M