Arizona republican., 1915-03-01

The hearing of the charges filed against City Manager W. A. Parish will be resumed at o'clock this afternoon, adjournment having been taken on Friday afternoon to this date. It IS understood there are still many wit nesses to be heard for the defense as well as number to be sworn by both sides in rebuttal.
 The written reply of Manager Parish to the charges has been but briefly re- viewed in The Republican. The reply covers the ground and scope of the hearing so completely and there have been so many inquiries regarding the defense Manager Parish is making, The Republican this morning prints the reply to the original charges The answer to the supplemental charges will appear tomorrow,
 Replying to the original charges Manager Parish says:
 To the Commission of the City of
 Phoenix:
 At the meeting of your commission i'.th OH AAlG a-tu bdy pl Jihheii J 7 1915, form of resolution was pre- scented to the Commission by MT r. H. Hayes, prefaced with a mum Der of preambles and to which is at tached the affida"its of one A. w. Costigan. one George o. Brisbois, and one Earl If. Parker, purporting to charge the City Manager of the city of Phoenix with alleged incompe tency and with certain acts and conduct in support of said alleged incompetency. said form of resolu- tion and preambles purporting to emanate from the Commission.
 However, the Commission has dis avowed that the matters alleged in the preambles of said form of re solution We're formulated or inst- gated by the Commission, but stated that the commission would consider the same as charges emanating from the said persons whose affidavits are attached thereto and requested the said city manager to answer said alleged charges of incompetency.
 Therefore, the said city manager takes this opportunity to answer the said alleged charges of incompetency. not. however, admitting the regu- larity. sufficiency CT legality of this proceeding, and especially objecting Io this proceeding upon the grounds that there is no ordinance of this comm g. ion nor provision of law, which warrants or authorizes this proce ding.
 The said city manager will answer the alleged specifications of incom potency as contained in said pre- ambles to said form of resolution in the order in which they are made as follows:
 This manager for answer to pre- amle I of said form of resolution denies that the cost of operation and maintenance of the City of Phoenix for the five months ending December 1, 1914, was $l4.6@$.53 over and above the cost of operation and maintenance of the city for the same five months during the year 1913: and denies that this manager can snow nothing of achievement or in creased benefit to the City of Phoe- nix to justify any increase in cost of operation. However this manager admits that there was an increase in the cost of maintenance and op- eration of the city government of Phoenix during the five months end ing December 1. 1914, over and above the cost of operation and mainten- ance of said government for the cor responding five months of 1913. to the amount of $9,S73.S9, and no more :; and this manager in that connection says that said increase of $9,S73.S9 as aforesaid was occasioned by many causes; chiefly of the change from one form of gov ernment to another, which necessar- fly required time and expense to properly organize an effective work ing force to carry out the changed conditions of government. To il- mstrate, the new charter created many offices which did not exist under the old charter, and the com mission, by ordinance, fixed the sal aries required to be paid by the city under the new charter and so fixed by ordinance amounted to $14,4l6, ,GG