The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1907-02-07
T F0ST Err CASE IS
FULLY ARGUED.
Learned Counsel Exiaustively
Discuss Legal Questions In
volvcd Therein.
ARGUE WRIT OF PROHIBITION
Attorneys Henry w. Anderson.
John L. Jcfirics and Attorney
General Speak.

Argument on the matter OF the issue
or a writ of prohibition directed to Judge
ID. Gardiner Tyler. OF the Circuit Court
Of the city OF williamsburg and Or. l..
s. Foster, recently Superintendent Of the
Eastern State Hospital. was heard BY the
Supreme Court OF Appeals of Virginia
yesterday All OF the judges sat in the
hearing except Judge r. II. Cardwell. s5
For three hours and a half the court
sat patiently listening to learned legal ar
gurnents i on the issues Involved in this
Intricate ana Inuch-confused case land
upon conclusion the court rose for the
day and retired 20 their consultation
chamber. It Is exnected that a decision
Will be rendered to-day, but that the
court Will not prepare a written opinion,
merely delivering Its decision orally and
ordering 1t to be entered.
The argument yesterday is apparently
the las t resource of DIR. l.. S. Folter5and
his counsel to stay the action fof the
General Hospital Board In removing him
from the Superintendency OF the Eastern
state Hospital. Unless counsel can dis
cover some Federal question upon which
to base an appeal to the Supreme Court
Of the United States. Such further ap-
peal is not regarded as probable
Able Array of Counsel.
lIlt sSJGthGIEs ScSleIuhS NCEc NIL 4ASi|if
w. Anderson. of Munford, Hunton. Will
liams & Anderson. who appeared for the
Central Hospital Board; Hon. j. I. JET
fries, OF Norfolk, who appeared for pr.
L. s. Foster, along with his law partner,
Mr.. Joseph II. Lawless, and finally At
torney General Anderson, who appeared
for the Commonwealth, and closed the
case
The questions at issue were-nrst the
4 ~ ~. -
pitAl Board in removing DIR. Foster from
Office in the manner this was done: and
second, the authority Of Judge Tyler, OF
the Circuit Court OF Williamsburg, to is
sue a writ of certiorari designed to re-
auirc a review of the case before the
action OF the board became Anal and do
cisive; the relation OF the hospital board
to the State government, the nature and
extent Of its powers under the Constitu-
ton. and the question OF the right OF an
appellate court to review the action OF
the board sitting in a judicial capacity, as
in the case at bar. The arguments were
exhaustive, and showed close study OF
analogous cases and of authorities bear
ing on the issues involved. All OF them
were carefully prepared and delivered
with clearness and force.
Besides filing an answer to the rule
requiring them to show cause why a
writ OF prohibition should not Issue,
Jeffries and Lawless had on Tuesday
filed demurrer to the petition for the
writ. The argument was upon botl, tho
answer and the demurrer, and in Its
range covered the details Of the now
celebrated case.
Not Subject to Review.
Mr.. Anderson. who is one OF the
ablest OF the younger members OF tho
Virginia. bar, opened the case in n care
fully prepared and ably delivered ar
gument. in which lie cited numerous
authorities In favor OF his contenllon
that the General Hospital Board IS q
co ordinate branch OF the government,
the acts and orders OF which are not
subiect to Judicial review.
Taking UP tho answer OF the re-
spondents, Mr. Anderson addressed
himself to their contention that the
case Is ono in which the Common
wealth has no interest. and 1t must
he brought in the name OF the Eastern
State Hospital, a public corporation,
and not in the name Of the State. COM
batting this position vigorously. He
quoted numerous legal authorities ana
determined cases, parallel or cognate
with this and all tending to sustain