Majority
Headnote
1. Cobo nebs—Nature op Oppice—New York City Charter. ' -The relator claims that his removal by the defendants was illegal, and brings this proceeding to compel the defendants to reinstate him. Prior to the adoption of the' charter of the city of New York (chapter 378, p. 1, of the Laws of 1897), the office of coroner had always been a county office, and recognized as such
“Four coroners shall hereafter be elected in the borough of Manhattan, two in the borough of the Bronx, two in the borough of Brooklyn, three in the borough of Queens and two in the borough of Richmond. They shall be elected in the same manner and at the same general elections as are the sheriffs in the several counties in which such boroughs are situated, shall hold their respective offices for the term of four years and shall be removable in the same manner as sheriffs.”
The charter thus having provided for the election of coroners in the city of New York, as borough officers, the provision of the consolidation act for the election of coroners for the city and county of New York was repealed, the election of coroners thereafter was regulated by the charter of the city of New York, and such coroners were thereafter to be elected as borough officers instead of county officers.
The question of the election of coroners under this provision of the charter was presented to the Appellate Division in the Second Department in the case of People ex rel. Burger v. Blair, 21 App. Div. 213 , 47 N. Y. Supp. 495 , affirmed on opinion below in 154 N. Y. 734 , 49 N. E. 1102 . It was held that the borough coroners are city officers, and their salaries, and the expenses of their offices are charged on the entire city alike; that the salaries and expenses of county coroners are county charges, and charged only upon the counties for which they are elected; and although, in the opinion, when discussing the election or appointment of coroners, it is said, “While the office is no longer a constitutional one, still it falls within section 2 of article 10 of the Constitution, which directs that all county officers shall be appointed by the board of supervisors or other county authorities, as the Legislature shall direct,” and that under this provision the Governor would have no power to appoint a coroner if a
Assuming, therefore, that the coroners are, under the charter of 1897, borough officers of the city of New York, elected under its provisions, the further question is presented as to whether section 1543 of the charter applied to clerks appointed by the coroners. Section 118, p. 35, of the charter, provides that the mayor shall appoint the heads of all departments and all commissioners, except as otherwise provided in the act. Section 96, p. 30, provides that there shall be 18 administrative departments in the said city, among which coroners are not included. By subsequent sections, these various departments and the duties that are imposed upon their heads are specified; and then, by section 1543, p. 541, it is provided that:
“The heads of all departments (except as otherwise specially provided) shall have power to appoint and remove all chiefs of bureaus (except the chamberlain) and also all clerks, officers, employees and subordinates in their respective departments, except as herein otherwise specially provided, without reference to the tenure of office of any existing appointee. But no regular clerk or head of a bureau shall be removed until he has been allowed an opportunity of making an explanation; and in every case of a removal, the true grounds thereof shall be forthwith entered upon the records of the department or board.”
Provision is then made by which the head of the department shall have the power to fix the salaries of all officers, clerks, employés, and subordinates in his department, whether before fixed by special law or otherwise. After these provisions applying to departments of the city government, there follow special provisions in relation to the appointment and regulation of other officers. Title 8 relates' to coroners. These provisions were continued in the amended charter of 1901 (chapter 466, pp. 645, 646, of the Laws of 1901) as sections 1570 and 1571 of that act. Section 1571 provides that:
“The coroners in each borough shall have an office in said borough and shall appoint a clerk who shall receive an annual salary to be fixed by the board of estimate and apportionment .and the board of aldermen, and such and so many assistant clerks as shall be provided for in the annual budget.”
The relator was appointed on the 15th day of November, 1902, chief clerk in the office of the coroners of the borough of Manhattan, city of New York, under this section of the charter.
I do not think that section 1543 of the charter has any application to clerks or other officers, except those in the regular city departments which are specified in that section. The departments of the city government are specified in the charter. The head of each department is appointed by the mayor. The duties of the heads and officers in the departments are regulated, and they become corporate officers to perform the duties imposed upon the municipal corporation. By section 1543 of the charter, the heads of the departments are given the power to appoint and remove all chiefs of bureaus, except the chamberlain, and also all clerks, officers, employés, and subordinates in their respective departments. It is quite clear that
"As there appear to be no other restrictions as to the power of the coroners to remove the relator, except that contained in section 1543 of the charter, and as that section does not apply, we can see no reason why the defendants had not authority to remove the relator without assigning any reason, or without giving the relator an opportunity to be heard; and it follows that the final order granting the peremptory mandamus must be reversed, and the proceeding dismissed, with costs. All concur.
Cases cited
- People ex rel. Burger v. Blair 21 App. Div. 213 p. 1123
- People ex rel. Burger v. Blair 154 N. Y. 734 p. 1123
- People ex rel. Maharin v. Plimley 1 App. Div. 458 p. 1125