For the prosecutor, George J. Miller.
For the respondents, Harry S. Medinets.
Before Justices Trenchard, Lloyd and Case.
The opinion of the court was delivered by
TRENCHARD, J. This writ of certiorari brings up for review an ordinance entitled "An ordinance to provide for the purchase of land, the improvement thereof for park purposes and the temporary financing thereof," passed by the board of commissioners of the city of Perth Amboy on July 3d, 1929.
The prosecutor first contends that the ordinance should be set aside because of the presentation to the city clerk within ten days after the publication of the ordinance of what is claimed to be in legal effect a petition protesting against making such improvement and incurring such indebtedness
pursuant to section 24, article 37 of the Home Rule act of 1917. Pamph. L., p. 461.
But a sufficient answer to such contention is that no such petition was presented as we shall show, and we therefore do not stop to consider whether, had the petition been what it is claimed to be, the prosecutor could have succeeded in setting aside the ordinance for that reason in a proceeding such as this.
Sixty-two sheets of the sixty-four of the petition that was presented (and which constitute the petition relied upon) were framed under section 17 of the Walsh act (Pamph. L. 1911, p. 480, as amended by Pamph. L. 1913, p. 323) and read as follows:
"To the Board of Commissioners of the City of Perth Amboy:
"We, the undersigned, being electors of the city of Perth Amboy, do hereby join in a petition protesting against the passage of an ordinance entitled 'An ordinance to provide for the purchase of land, the improvement thereof for park purposes and the temporary financing thereof,' passed on first reading on May 15th, 1929, and require you to suspend the same from going into operation, and we request that you either repeal the said ordinance or submit it to a vote of the people as ...