The Penn's Grove record., 1920-12-31
Supreme Courts Decision Up
holds Governors Power to Re-
move Utility Commission.
SPLENDID BANKING REPORT.
Governor and Courts Determined &c
Check Crime Wave In New Jer-
sey-Farmers to Request
New Auto Laws.

Utilities Commission by Governor Ed
wards for "misconduct and neglect of
duty" has been upheld by the Su-
preme Court in an opinion handed
down at Trenton.
The decision upholds the constitu-
tionality of the section of the public
utilities law giving the governor pow
err to remove from Office upon charges
and holds that in conducting the pro-
ceedings provided by law the COVER
nor is not bound to observe any par
ticular form so long as the proceed
ings are substantially In compliance
with the statute.
The practical effect of the decision,
unless reversed On appeal, is to re-
move from Office President John w.
Slocum, Andrew Gaul, George F.
Wright and Harry L. Knight, who
have continued to exercise the func-
lions of public utility commissioners
Notwithstanding their removal from
office by the governor, whose appoint
ment of new commissioners has not
been acted upon by the senate.
Governor Edwards, when he learn
ed of the decision Immediately an
nounced that he would call a special
session of the senate to confirm his
appointments to the new board.
II am gratifed at the decision of
the court, because it so clearly shows
/ was right" was the governors only
comment upon the finding.
The nominees of the governor for
the new board are: James A. Hamill
of Jersey City, Treadwell Cleveland
of Newark, former State Senator
James A. C. johnson of Englewood,
State Highway Commissioner Walter
F. Whittemore of Newton and Arthur
A. Quinn Of Perth Amboy, president of
the State Federation of Labor.
Immediately upon receiving word
from Trenton that the Supreme Court
had upheld the governor, Josiah
Stryker of Lindabury, Depue & Falks,
who represented the utility commits
sioners in the custer proceedings, stat
ed that an appeal would be taken to
the Court of Errors and Appeals. He
had no comment to make upon the
decision. 1t has act yet been definite
ly decided whether or not the appeal
will act as a stay of proceedings.
The quo warranto action brought in
the name of Attorney General Thomas
f. McCran against the old commission
was argued before Justices Trenchard,
Minturn and Black. The opinion filed
is not credited to any single justice,
but is marked "Opinion Delivered by
the Court"
Summarizing the legal principles es-
tablished by the de cision the syllabus
of the opinion says:
"One-Section 2 of the public utility
law CPS LIS 1911 p. 374), which pro-
vides that the governor may remove
any commissioners for neglect of duty
or misconduct in office does not at
tempt to confer upon the governor
judicial power in c~ontravention of Ar
ticle 3 of the Constitution nor does it
attempt to confer upon the governor
jurisdiction which by Article 8, Para
graph II, Article 6, Sections l and 2 is
vested solely in the court for the trial
of impeachment, and such statute, as
against such objection, is constitu-
tional.
Collaborating upon these legal prin-
ciples, the body of the opinion showed
that the9policy of comforting upon the
governor the power of removal for
cause of statutory state officers APP
pointed for a final term is not a new
one in this state, did not originate in
the public utility law of 1911, and
whether constitutional OF not, has
been exercised many years before, and
frequently since that time.
"Second-In a proceeding for the
removal of a member of the Board of
Public Utilities Commissioners under
Section 2 of the public utility law
charges are sufficient which specify
the particulars of the neglect of du-
ties and misconduct in office complain
ed of, with such reasonable detail and
precision as to fully inform him of
what de~relictions of duty are urged
against him.
"In a proceeding Tor the removal of
a member of the Board of Public
Utility Commissioners under Section
2 of the public utility law no partic-
ular formality is essential so long as,
upon the whole, the proceeding is sub
s%tantially such as is provided for by
the statute"
Examples of this transfer of power
to the chief executive excited by the
court include the act of 1891 creating
the State Department of Banking and
Insurance, the act of 1917 providing
for the appointment If a state archi-
tect. the act of 1918 creating the
State Board of Institutions and Agen-
cies and the Public Utilities act pass
ed after the late Governor Fort in his
inaugural address haC recommended
enactment of a law empowering the
to remove from office any
official appointed by statute for
or neglect TO perform his duty.
A.