Trs. of Free Pub. Library of Newark v. Civil Serv. Comm'n of N.J.

• Decision Date: 19 March 1914
• Citation: 90 A. 261,86 N.J.L. 307
• Parties: TRUSTEES OF FREE PUBLIC LIBRARY OF NEWARK v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION OF NEW JERSEY.
• Court: New Jersey Supreme Court

90 A. 261

86 N.J.L. 307

TRUSTEES OF FREE PUBLIC LIBRARY OF NEWARK

v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION OF NEW JERSEY.

Court of Errors and Appeals of New Jersey.

March 19, 1914.

Appeal from Supreme Court.

Certiorari by the Trustees of the Free Public Library of Newark against the Civil Service Commission of New Jersey to set aside the commission's action in classifying the employés of the Free Public Library of Newark. From an order affirming the commission's action (83 N. J. Law, 196, 83 Atl. 980), the trustees appeal. Affirmed.

Pitney, Hardin & Skinner, of Newark, for appellants. Edmund Wilson, Atty. Gen., for appellees.

MINTURN, J. The only question presented upon this appeal is whether the Civil Service Commission was warranted in classifying the appointees of the Free Public Library of the city of Newark, within the provisions of the civil service act (P. L. 1908, p. 235); the contention of the appellants being that they hold neither offices nor positions in the paid service of the state, or of the city of Newark; while the insistence of the Civil Service Commission is that the Free Public Library of the city of Newark is but an agency of the state, created for a specified work, to which are delegated specific powers to enable it to perform the delegated work.

We find it unnecessary, in view of the completeness of the recital of the facts, and the legislation bearing upon this question, contained in the opinion of Mr. Justice Voorhees in this case in the Supreme Court (83 N. J. Law, 196, 83 Atl. 980), to rehearse the facts and legislation in detail.

We are not called upon, in affirming this judgment, to accede entirely to the reasoning contained in the Supreme Court opinion. When the case sub judice was before that court, the case of Sullivan v. McOsker was under consideration by this court; and the question there presented was whether the warden of the Hudson county jail, who, with other subordinate officials, had always been selected by the incoming sheriff as substantially his personal attachees, but whose salaries had been paid by the county, was protected from removal by the provisions of the civil service act; and this court held, in effect, that the character or method of selection did not supply the test as to the application of the provisions of the act; the essential inquiry being whether the incumbent was in the paid service of the county. Sullivan v. McOsker, 84 N. J. Law, 380, 86 Atl. 497. While not entirely analogous in its facts, ...