San Antonio light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1911-1993, 1923-03-28
Frank Young, City En-
ploye, on Trial for Al
legged Misconduct.
CONTRACT HELD LEGAL
Only One Witness Testifies
Against Accused at
Hearing.

Il
Wednesday. Young is on trial on
charges filed by ]. B. Banks alleging
that Young accepted 80 cents a day
from a pipe layer whom he loaned to
sewer contractor and that he is re-
ceiving a royalty on patented man
hole form which is being used by a
contracting company doing work for
the city.
Testimony had not been concluded
at / o'clock and the commission re
&c ssed until 3 o'clock. A hearing of
charge against City Engineer ID. d..
IIarrigan, set for O'Clock Wednes-
day afternoon nece>-rily was post
poncd until 10 CLOCK Friday morn
ing.
Manuel Silva. pipe layer at one
time employed by the city had pre-
viously testified that he was working
for the city for $3.50 a day and that
he had been loaned to c. A. Anderson,
sewer contractor, who paid him 81
day. He contributed 80 cents out of
every 81 he received, he said, to Frank
Young and understood that it was for
the campaign fund. Testimony brought
out showed that Silva was not carried
on the city payroll during the time
he was loaned out. Silva testified
that he paid Young in all about $40.
Say Rieden Sanctioned Agreement.
II did not receive cent from Silva
or any other employe who had been
loaned out" Young testified. Nor
did i receive any part of the 81 for
campaign purposes. / have loaned
number of men out but never received
a cent from then nor were they ever
carried on the city payroll while they
were working elsewhere.
Considerable amusement was caused
during the hearing when a. j. Monier,
n contractor. testifying for Young,
stated that he had rented some of the
city forms with which TO build man
holes. for which he was to pay the
city a rental of 81 per manhole and
that the agreement was with the APP
prOval of Commissioner Rieden. Com
missioner Rieden at once interrupted
With denial. stating that he had
never heard of the deal. Young. when
placed on the stand testified TO the
same agreemnt, stating that the street
commissioner gave him authority to
make it.
Say Manhole Contract Legal.
1t was also brought out in the teS-
timony that Young had obtained 4
patent on sewer manholes. that he had
later transferred the patent TO his
wife. that he had contract with the
Elder Construction Company whereby
he was to receive a royalty of So Oh
each manhole built by them of this
design and that the Elder Construc'
ton Company was building such mar
holes for the city under contract. As
sistant City Attorney Ray Marshall
admitted on the stand that he had
given Young "curbstone" opinion
that such a contract between the FL
der Construction Company and him
would not be in violation of the city
charter. Mr.. Marshall reiterated this
opinion before the commission We'd
nesday.
An attorney for Young. in enter
ing a general demurrer to the charges,
asserted that they were brought for
the purpose of injuring Young's repu-
tation and were instigated by members
of the city engineering department.
He asked that the city engineer be
excluded from the hearing but this
was denied.
One Claims He Paid Young.
Silva. the only witness placed on
the stand by the proponents. testified
that Young told him to go to work for
Anderson at 81 day. that out of this
81 he gave Young 80 cents. He paid
Young. he said about SO and under
stood that it was to go for campaign
expenses.
Il don't remember" Silva said. iii
he said whether or not he wanted the
money for himeslf."
On cross examination Silva said he
had been loaned out three different
times and paid out no money except
| TO Young. The city didn't pay him dur
| ing the time he was loaned out, be
| said
f. III. Elder, of the Elder Constru-
ton Company. testified regarding the
contract between Young and him, and
also that there is a saving Of about
| IS on manholes built under the Young
design, as against the brick manholes
The contract introduced in evidence
was made between Young and the CON-
pany, although the name of Mrs
Young had been inserted with pen and
ink.
Attorney Sees No Offense.
Mr.. Elder admitted that the con
tract between Young and him enti
tied him TO use the patent on worl
other than that done for the city
1t was also brought out that YOUNG
is using the same forms for city worl
and without charge TO the city.
A technical discussion as to wheth
er Young was directly or indirectl!
interested in the work being done b!
the Elder Construction Company be
cause Of the fact that he is receiving
a royalty on the patent, ensued whei
Mr.. Marshall took the stand. Mr.
Marshall admitted that while Youn,
may not be Interested in the contrac,
he could indirectly have an interest
or could be interested in the work
On question by Commi' sioner Wrigh
he said offhand he does not now be
leive that Young has violated any cit,
charter provision or ordinance in re
ceiving royalty from the construC
ton company. He would need TO lool
up authorities. however, he said, TO b
, absolutely clear on the subject.
Was Not Suspended.
: Commissioner Wright here ex
/ | pressed the opinion that IL the cit