Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1910-02-04

es and counties may adopt the law by
/ for in section 81. and that in such case
spirit of the constitution.
, The first part of the opinion is
voluminous. In reaching his conclu-
sion that the law is constitutional and
that the Legislature acted within its
authority in passing it, Justice Gar
rison says;
'It has, I think, been made evident
by the foregoing considerations that
there are three views that may he
taken with respect to the existence of
a constitutional limitation. by force OF
which the Legislature is prohibited
from creating and providing for the
appointment OF commission to func-
tion in the regulation of municipal
officers unless the members of such
commission are selected from the citi-
zens Of such municipality.
Practically, therefore, these views
all converge to a common end that re-
suits in our refusal to declare that tho
civil service act OF 1908 is unconstitu-
tional in the respects urged against it's
validity upon this branch of the press
ent case.
This. for the purposes of the case
in hand, disposes of the constitutional
question raised by the first query put
to counsel by the court.
"First, That no such limitation
exists, either as provision of the con-
stitution or as spirit pervading that
instrument.
Second. That the right to create such
commission. If not expressly en-
joined. is implicitly conferred upon the
T xf.-le. Al
ton.
Third, That If either one of these
views be- tenable or even permissible
the contrary view is by that circun-
stance alone rendered doubtful within
the meaning Of Chief Justice Marshalrs
rule that in no doubtful case will a
court pronounce a legislative act to
be contrary to the constitution
Having established the constitutions
ality OF the. general act the court then
asks:
Assuming that the Legislature has
authority to create such a commission.
so composed and clothed with such
powers, it cannot delegate to the gov
erning body Of such municipality, in
stead of to the voters thereof, the de-
termination of the question whether
the powers conferred upon the COM
mission shall be exercised by it In the
municipality.
Upon the answer to that question
hung the fate of all those who are now
placed outside the protection of the
measure and made subject to. the
operations of ihe old spoils system.
The answer to the question by the
Court of Errors and Appeals in SUBJ
stance is mo"
In lengthy statement of the case
Justice Garrison holds that the Legis-
latrue could not delegate powers to the
governing body of any municipality,
while such powers might constitu-
tionally be delegated to the voters.
There is nothing gained by weeping
over spilled milk, but it will be re-
membered that Alderman Jerome r..
Congleton took the position that the
law should be adopted by vote of the
people, and went to the Council with
a petition for submitting the questioA
to the people, as prescribed in section
81, which is upheld This petition was
not presented, as the members of tho
Council decided to pass an ordinance
adopting the provisions of the law. The
first question upon which a vote was
taken was as follows:
1.-THE act of April 10, 1908, is not un-
constitutional insofar as it provides
that in municipalities that adopt the
act the appointment of certain officers
and employees shall be regulated in
part by commission, the members OF
which are not appointed by or from the
electors or inhabitants of such nnunici-
pality respectively"
on this point the court by a vote OF
fourteen voted in favor OF the point. and
none i'll the negative.
The next question voted upon by the
court was as follows:
THE act is unconstitutional in so far
as it is made to take effect in munici-
palities upon its adoption by the gov
erning bedy thereof"
Upon this question the vote stood
thirteen tfor and one against. Chan
cellor Pitney. voting alone against. do
claring that part of the act unconstitu-
tional The next question voted upon
was:
"Shall the judgment Of the Supreme
Court be affirmed?"
The vote on this was fourteen voting
yes and none voting in the negative.
This last question dealt with the case
of County Collector Richard w. Booth,