San Antonio light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1911-1993, 1923-02-11
Commissioner Denied In
junction and Engineer
Granted One.
HARRIGAN MAY RESIGN
Now That He Is INDICATED
He May Relinquish
~ Office.


fernoon when Judge Robert w. B. Ter
rel in the 73rd district court dismissed
commissioner Rieden's injunction suit
against the city engineer and granted
the latter an injunction against the
&etreet commissioner. The last-named in
junction restraints Commissioner RE
den from interfering with Mr.. Harri-
gan in the performance of his duties
and remains in effect by order of the
court until the city engineers success
or is duly nominated and confirmed by
the city council. Judge Terrell's de-
cision came as a distinct surprise and
severe blow to the street commissioner.
Judge Terrell at the same time dis
missed Commissioner Rieden's suit
against II other employees in the city
engineering department. The street
commissioner had secured a temporary
writ of injunction restraining these en-
ployes from attempting TO perform their
duties or. in any way interfering with
the street commissioner in the conduct
of his department. These men. it was
stated late Saturday, will return TO
their jobs.
Rieden Can't Fire" These Men.
Refusal of Judge Terrell TO sustain
Commissioner Rieden in the relief
sought; that is, an injunction to re-
II
ployes from performing their duties af-
ter be had fired" them, is construed
to mean that the street commissioner
was without authority to fire" his
men. 1t is also taken to mean that
the ordinance adopted by the city coun-
ell authorizing the street commissioner
to reduce his force by discharging en-
ployes and abolishing offices was in
valid. These two legal questions were
argued at length by counsel on both
sides, the arguments lasting nearly two
days. Robert ]. Mcmillan represented
Mr.. Harrigan, John Sehorn the other
employees of the engineering department
and Martin Arnold the street commits
sionet
After attorneys had "milled' around
all Friday afternoon and a greater part
OF Saturday morning, Judge Terrell be-
came impatient and suggested that the
case might be tried on an agreed state
ment of facts. More than an hour
was then required to get these facts
into the record. Mr.. Rieden's counsel
agreed that the record should show that
=, Mr.. Harrigan was a de facto employe
of the city and that the u employees
were performing stated duties and re-
ceiying stated salaries up to the time of
their attempted discharge. Arguments
the ordinance in question and to the
commissioners inherent right TO dis
charge as well as name the employees
in his department.
Council Alone May Discharge Men.
Mr.. Mcmillan and Judge SehOrn took
the position that the ordinance grant
ing Commissioner Rieden authority to
discharge his men and abolish offices
WIS invalid in that it delegated power
which was vested solely in the city
council. They also contended that the
right to discharge salaried employees
and abolish jobs rested solely with the
council. 1t was also charged that the
ordinance was vague and indefinite in
that it did not name the offices to be
abolished or the employees to be dis
charged, While Judge Terrell did not
rule on the validity of the ordinance
he intimated in remarks made from the
bench that he believed it to be void.
IL was thought for time that Mayor
BLACK would be required to take the
stand to testify regarding his veto of
"a resolution passed by the council, sub
sequent to the passage of the ordinance,
directing the reinstatement of the city
engineer and the II employees. Mr.. Nc
MILAN, representing Mr.. Harrigan. in
formed the court that he expected to
prove that the mayor had signed the
resolution and then attempted to veto
1t. The resolution, Mr.. Mcmillan stat
ed, had disappeared from the city
clerks office and could not be found
Mayor Black was present in the court
room during the afternoon but was not
called to the stand.
= Says Mayor Sanctioned Suit.
One feature of the hearing was a
Statement made for the record by Judge
ri ~ vi o,-
afternoon, that Mayor Black had sane
fioned the filing of the suit after the
petition had been prepared upon request
or Commissioner Rieden, The mayor, at
n recent council meeting, had stated
that he knew nothing of the filing of
this suit and had not sanctioned it.
This statement was made after Com
missioner Pfeiffer had questioned the
city attorneys right to file a suit
axainst the engineering department en-
pIoyes in the name of the city Of San
Antonio.
what steps Commissioner Rieden
wilI now take in the controversy at the
r.ity hall is causing considerable specu-
1afion. The 81 employees, it is under
eto,d. expect to resume their duties
Tuesday, Monday being a holiday. Mr.
Harrigan has never ceased to perform
his duties since he was fired" The
fact that Judge Ierrells decision up
4 holds the right of the 81 men to re.
main in the city's employ until ordered
discharged by the council, it IS be-
lieyed, viii not affect about 400 other
r,en laid off by the street commissioner
- the majority of them were day In.
,orers. 1t may, however, affect a mum.
Yb<r Of men who are not.
Believe HarTigan Will Resign.
It is believed that City Engineer
Hsrrisan. if he so wishes, can retain
his lob during the remainder of the
term of office of the Black administra.
ton. 1t is known that Commissioners
Wright. Lambert and Pfeiffer are
friendly to him and that they consider
that he has rendered the city efficient
service and for this reason it is not
, believed they would vote for the con
firrnation of successor. The mayor
and street commissioner, with only two
votes at their disposal, could not sc,
rnre his successors confirmat ton.
II Is generally believed ut the city
AL. however, that Sir. Harrigan, since
- has been yindicated and his right
- hold his office upheld by the courts
~;ll now resign. He declined Saturday