The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1898-06-22
THEY WANT THEIR Salaries.
CITY OFFICIALS SCORE IN THE SUIT
AGAINST COMPTROLLER PARRY.
Jsd&e Moore Holds the Former SAL
ary Ordinaace Invalid and Over
rules the City's Demarrer-A

In overriding the citys demurrer in the
Thomson mandanus suit. brought by the
city engineer against Comptroller Parry,
Judge ". III. Moore yesterday held that
the salary ordinance passed over Mayor
Woods veto TWO years ago is Invalid and
that the complainant has a right 20 sue.
An interesting law question is involved n
the case bur more than this, the courts
ruling is victory for the city engineer
and his associates. Supt. Little. Of the
street department; Supt. l.. +. Youngs, Of
the water department. Chief Reed. Of the
partmsnt.
Unless the city. through Corporation
Counsel WI T.. Humphrey. succeeds In
establishing the allegation that Mr.. Thom-
son and his associates ia the aimin.sira-
ton are estopped from. Pleading the inva.-
tdlty OF the ordinance, Judgment will prob
ably be for the plaintiffs. This morning
the second stage in the suit Will be
reached when the city Will file a plea OF
estoppe,.
The effect OF the courts ruling yes,eg-
day is to give Mr.. Thomson a good show
20 obtain the increase in his salary which
the council recently allowed him ami the
other officials named III the recent sal
airy ordinance.
Nearly three months ago the council
passed the new salary ordinance which
was approved by Mayor Humes. and
which gave the city officials and employ
es a generous increase in the pecunlary
ssipands which they enjoy. warrant
being drawn at the end Of the iirst month
FOR those whose salaries were Increased
the city comptroller refused to countersign
fl on the ground that the charter forbade
an increase In an officers salary during
his term OF office. An investigation was
thereupon made In behalf OF City Engin-
eer Thomson and the other members OF
the administration who were affected by
Mr.. Parry's ruling Several discrepancies
were found In the salary ordinance under
which the city has been working ever
since the new charter was adopted.
After consultation il was decided 10
take the matter into the courts attack
Ing the Cd ordinance on the ground that
II was Invalid and void. \ suit was
brought by Mr.. Thomson. who applied for
writ OF mandate directing Comp:roiler
Parry 10 countersign his warrants. IL was
alleged that the salaries OF the city Off
ciaIs had never been 6xsd by ordinance
as the charter prescrsbes. To support this
contention II was claimed In behalf Of
Mr. Thomson that the old sa,ary ordinance
vas Invalid on three grounds; first that
The certificate attesttng its passage was
defective: second. that the city had not
printed in full In me official paper Mayor
Woods reasons FOR tetoing Il: and, third
that the council had passed the ordnance
over the mayors veto within four davs
after publication Of the mayors veto.
whereas the charter prescribes that an or
dinances which have received executive
d.sapproeai shah he considered IS the
council villain not less than five days ana
not more than thirty days after such pub
.icaton.
II was established In the hearing on the
demurrer yesterday that the council had
considered and passed the ordinance four
DAYS after the veto. This was the fatal
objection - the ordinance ana on this
ground Judge Moore ruled aga.us. tho
city. holding that the original salar, ord
nance wa not nor had !; been Il iawfu,
ordinance Of the city.
The demurrer filed by the city was ar
guod by corporation Counsel Humphrey
for the city. and George porworth fo-
MI. thomson. The iatter's salary is
raised under the nev ordinance from
!No 10 S9so per year The other mem
hers ~ the board - public works az we'll
a. the CHIEFS ~ the police and Are d.
par.nf2's. are affected by the courts ri,'
lng. whlch = Is claimed amounts to 4
practical ftctory. The contest while srt~-
ited n character was conducted with Yooa
feeling or both sides. Mr.. par~v,s ,~.i(.-,
being merely for the prote ion % me civ
and his hon5smen.
az