Perth Amboy evening news., 1906-04-05
DISTRICT BIZ
WAS DEFEATED
Assembly Districts Voted Down
in the Lower House Of LegiS-
latuTG Yesterday.

iutuiG
TRENTON, Apr 5.-One of the
greatest surprises of the legislative
session came yesterday when the as
sembly killed tho administration bill
providing for the election Of assem-
blymen by districts instead of by
counties.
Mr.. Perkins briefly explained the
measure. and told how there was an
almost universal demand from all
parts of The state for the election of
an asscmblyman by districts. The
matter, he said, had been thoroughly
discussed. and every member ought
TO DE acquainted with its details.
The measure was vigorously oppos
ed by Mr.. Miller, of Cumberland. who
claimed that it was clearly unconsti-
tutional, and that there was no great
public demand for it. The present
system of electing assemblymen by
the county at large, he characterized
as the proper method. He warned The
house that in passing the bill it would
do an injury TO its party by returning
TO the old system of gerrymandering.
Mr., Perkins and Mr.. Miller indulg-
ed in a running debate in which the
Cumberland man maintained that the
act was unconstitutional. because the
decision of the supreme Il was the
law of the land until it was reversed
by the court of errors and appeals.
while Mr., Perkins held that, as the
matter had never been passed upon
by the higher court, it was proper to
pass the bill.
Mr.. Martin advocated the bill. The
proposition was, he said, whether
they believed in the election of as
semblymen by districts, and any one
who had studied the subject must
answer, Yes" He believed that the
same principle should be extended to
elected upon the basis of population.
This was a step in the right direction,
he said, and he believed that the time
was coming when the senators would
be elected in that manner The old
method of electing the assemblymen
by districts was attacked by the Re
publicans of Essex, he said, because
some persons interested wanted TO
retain control Of the assembly dele
cation from that county.
The reason that the case had not
been taken TO the court OF errors, he
said, was that as 500 as the supreme
court had declared the act unconsti-
tutional the legislature repealed the
law. He was going out, he declared,
10 urge amending the constitution. so
that senator's should be elected ac-
cording to population.
Mr.. Vanderveer of Monmouth also
opposed the bill.
Mr.. Marelli believed in the princi-
pie of electing assemblymen by dis
tricts, but he did not see how under
his oath as an assemblyman he could
vote for a bill that was unconstitu-
tional. The bill was opposed by Mr..
Elyins on the same ground, and by
smaller counties.
Mr.. Morris, of Sussex, opposed the
bill on the same ground that Mr.. Mar
in favored it. That was that it was
step in the right direction and tend
TO bring about the election of sen
'ors according to population. He
oEe at length on the great injustice
would be done to the rural coun-
TO vote against the bill. The
s'slre was defeated by this vote:
.Ayes-Barber, Bierck, Chaplin,
''lgate, Crowther, Eggers, Everett.
Twin, Hines. Jones, Martin. Mills,
Morgan, Patterson, Scott, Scovel, II.
.. Thompson. H. F. Thompson. Till
man, Tucker, Underwood, Walsh,
Wise, Wooley-25.
Nays-Berg, Cattell, Drake. Ell
wins. Firth, Gibbs. Heck, Henry,
Hoaglaud, Hoi"0mbe. Hunt. Trick,
Coyle, Ee.-,", Mabie, Marelli, Miller.
Morris, Prince. Reed, Robbins, Roe
Der, Scribe, Vanderyeer, Wright-26.
Nj. Perkins changed from aye TO
in order to reconsider. This mo-
ton was tabled, as the measure may
be called up again.