The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1906-04-10
All Efforts to Amend Or Dis
cuss the Re-districting
ELL When Reconsidersd
Choked Of By Leader
Perkins
PREVIOUS QUESTION sILENcEs
AssEMBLYMAN BIERCK. OF HUD-
SON. GOT A LESSON IN PARLIA-
MENTARY TACTICS IN HIS Eff
FORTS TO INTRODUCE AMEND
MENTS
Special to 'The Jersey City News.'D

Special to "The Jersey City News'')
TRENTON. April 10, 1906.-Assem-
blyman iBierck, of Hudson. was gwen an
experience in parliamentary law in the
House last night which he will never for
get He intended TO amend the Assem-
bly, Ie-distrieting bill when the vote by
which it was defeated last Wednesday
was reconsidered. but exactly how he
should go about carrying out his inten-
tiof's he did not know until it was too
late. and then he found himself in the
position of boy chasing a butterfly.
The previous question, or better said the
gag rule was applied when he sought
to amend the bill
Governor Stokes and the State House
ring decre6ing that the Assembly reds
tricting bill should go through this Legs
lature. notwithstanding its defeat last
Wednesday and the threatened opposi-
ton of the Colbsites had paved the way
by which the bill could be passed They
placed the screws fsn the recalcitrant
! South jersey members who had voted
against the bill FAST Wednesday, and
practically forced them tt, change their
minds.
As result. when Leader Perkins last
night moved to reconsider the vote by
which it was lost it was adopted by a
vote of 40 to IA. Mr.. Perkins theR i'm
mediately moved that the bill be ad-
vanced to third reading. and before any
member could interpose any objection
Speaker Robbins declared it carried by a
viva voce vote.
Mr.. Bierck then proposed that the bill
be placed back on second reading for the
purpose of amendment. Leader Perkins
moved the previous question, which was
TO take the bill up for third reading, and
the Speaker sustained him by declaring
Mr.. Biercks motion out of order.
Mr.. Bierckl realized that he was up
against it by such ruling, but he was de-
termined to fight. He declared that
while he believed in the re-districting
measure, he could not approve of it in
its present shape. He said that as it
had to go to the Court of Errors and
Appeals for decision regarding its con-
stitutionality. it might be many months
before a decision would be reached. and
fer that reason he asked to have it plac-
ed back on second reading so that an
amendment could be made making the
bill take effect on January l. 1907.
The Speaker again declared Mr.. B:erck
out of order upon Mr. Perkins's insist
'ment of the previous question. The bill
then passed by vote of 40 to TO-
Not dismayed by the set back he re-
eeived Mr. Bierck moved that the vote
by which the bill was passed be recon
sidered.
Leader Perkins moved that his motion
be laid on the table Assemblyman Mil
| Ter defended Bierck by saying that he
had right to debate his motion. The
House was in an uproar by this time
Members ran from desk to desk ana
sought information regarding the House
rules ON the question. While this was
pending DIR. Crowther moved that the
motion to reconsider be postponed indefi-
nitely. Leader Perkins sought4to induce
him to withdraw this motion, but before
DIR. Crowther could do so. Speaker Rob-
bins declared it carried by viva voee
vote.
Leader Perkins was visably displeased
and expressed regret that DIR. Crowthers
motion was adopted. 1t enabled the OPP
ponents of the bill to take. up the fight
again whenever they managed to secure
majority vote. M
The Essex delegation split on the bill.
Last week nine of the members voted
for the bill and four against it. Tonight
there were four votes against the bill,
namely. Morgan Scribe. Summers and
Underwood. The entire delegation might
| have vofad against tbe hill toniuht h1,r