Arizona republican., 1915-03-16
COMMISSION ORDERS PARISH OTJT
 AND NAMES CRAIG AS HIS SUCCESSOR
The Oydey And
 CeYtlOy0yi WWt
 Issued Yesterday

Following is the copy of the order issued by Judge stanford directing the issuance of a writ of certiorari against Mayor Young and the four members of the city commission
 In the Superior Court of the State of Arizona, in and for Maricopa County
 In the matter of the petition of w. A. Parish, for a writ of certiorari. Order for writ of certiorari.
 On reading and filing the verified pe- tition of w. A. Parish,
 It is ordered that a writ of certiorari issue out of and under the seal of this court. directed to the said George C. Young, mayor of the city of Phoenix, and Joseph M. Cope, M. J. Foley, Peter Corpstein, and Frank Wood composing the city commission of the city of Phoenix, in the state of Arizona; as prayed for in said petition.
 R. C. STANFORD.
 Judge
 Immediately upon receipt of the foregoing order, Deputy Clerk J. Elmer Johnson, acting in the absence of Clerk James Miller, Jr, caused the following writ to issue:
 In the Superior Court of the State of Arizona, in and for Maricopa County
 In the matter of the petition of w. A. Parish, for writ of certiorari. Writ of certiorari.
 The state of Arizona,
 To George U. Young, mayor of the city of Phoenix, and Joseph M. Cope, M. J. Foley, Peter Corpstein, and Frank Wood. composing the city commission of the city of Phoenix, in the state of Arizona:
 Whereas, there has been represented to us by the verified petition of w. A. Parish, that lately before you, or ma : iority of you, composing at the time, the city commission of the city of Phoenix, in the state of Arizona, such proceedings have been had that you or majority of YOU have irregularly and without authority or jurisdiction in the premises, discharged. dismissed, and re- moved from office the said w. A. Far ish. the city manager of said city, duly
 
 city; and whereas, it is alleged by said W. A. Parish that your proceedings have been irregular. without authority and in violation of the provisions of law, in this:
 That said city commission has never passed or adopted any ordinance reso- lution or order defining or declaring EEat hol h. fnr of the city manager, and has never passed or adopted any ordinance. reso lution or ordering regulating or pre- scribing what shall be cause for such removal. and that in the absence of such ordinance, resolution or order the power granted to the city commission by the charter of the city of Phoenix for the removal of the city manager fol cause, is not self-executing.
 That in the absence of such an ord nance. resolution or order the city manager can only be removed for mal- feasance in office, as provided bv the statute law Of the state of Arizona, and that in the proceedings for the remova of said w. A. Parish as city manager there was and is no charge against him of malfeasance in office, neither was there any evidence introduced al said hearing, showing or tending tC show that said w. A Parish was guilty of malfeasance whatever in office; that at said hearing there was no evi- dence to show or prove, or tending tC show or prove. that said W. A. Farsl was incompetent in any respect or par. ticular, as attempted to be charged, ol | that he was guilty of misconduct in of. | flee. or neglect of duty as such cit, | manager and that said city commission acted arbitrarily and without any evi
 (Continued on Page Ten)