
    JOHN ROTH, PROSECUTOR, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYONNE, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR.
    Submitted July 3, 1913
    Decided December 4, 1913.
    On error to the Supreme Court, in which the following per curiam was filed:
    For the reasons given in the opinion filed by Mr. Justice Minium, in the case of McGrath v. Bayonne, 54 Vroom 224, the resolution of the board of council of the city of Bayonne, removing the prosecutor from the position of second assistant collector of revenue will be set aside.
    For the plaintiffs in error, Dcuiiel J. Murray and Warren Dixon.
    
    For the defendant in error, Benny & Gruden.
    
   Per Curiam.

The questions presented for consideration by this writ of error are identical with those discussed by us in the opinion delivered at this term in the ease of McGrath v. Bayonne, ante p. 188; and for the reasons set ont in that opinion the judgment under review in the present case will be reversed.

For affirmance — None.

For reversal — The Chibe Justice, Garrison, Swayze, Bergen, Yoorhees, Kalisch, Yredenburgh, Congdon, White, Terhune, Heppeniieimer, JJ. 11.  