
    (7 App. Div. 203)
    WAGNER v. COLLIS.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
    June 29, 1896.)
    Civil Service Laws—Labor on Public Works—Exempt Fireman.
    An exempt fireman, who is detailed as a laborer on public works, is not entitled to the protection -of Laws 1892, c. 577, relating to veterans of the war.
    Appeal from special term, New York county.
    Application by Henry Wagner for writ of mandamus against Charles H. T. Collis, commissioner. From an order denying a motion for a peremptory writ, petitioner appeals. Affirmed.
    Argued before VAN BRUNT, P. J., and BARRETT, PATTERSON, O’BRIEN, and INGRAHAM, JJ.
    Louis J. Grant, for appellant.
    Terence Farley, for respondent.
   BARRETT, J.

It is not claimed that exempt firemen are entitled' to preference in employment upon public works, as are honorably, discharged soldiers and sailors. The claim is that, being in suehemployment, they can only be removed for cause shown, after a hearing had under chapter 577 of the Laws of 1892. But this act relates only to persons holding positions by appointment, receiving a salary from the city. It has been held that a day laborer does not come, within this provision. Meyers v. City of New York, 69 Hun, 291, 23 N. Y. Supp. 484. In the case at bar the petitioner was not even. a regular laborer. He was simply a detailed laborer. He was removed because bis service as such detailed laborer was not required, and no one was appointed in Ms place.

The mandamus was properly refused, and' the order appealed from should be affirmed, with costs. All concur.  