The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1911-12-21
COURT D|SMISSES
CONTEMPT RULE
Had No Authority to Review
Action of Board in Removing
DR.. Darlington.
MANDAMus FOR SALARY
Auditor Directed to Pay for
Period Between Removals.
Both Sides to Appeal.

Tho removal OF DR.. Charles V. Car
rinston as surgeon at tho State Peni-
tertiary by the board of directors of
the prison on December 9, after due
notice and hearing, was held by Judge
X Carter Scott. Of tho City Circuit
Court. yesterday to have been entirely
legal and regular. and tho rule issued
against members OF the prison board 20
show cause why they should not bo
punished for contempt in refusing 70
admit DR.. Darlington to tho dulles II
the office WAS dismissed
AT the same time the court decided
that Dr. Darlington was entitled 10
ms salary as prison surgeon from No
vcmber l TO December 9. tho period
between his first and second removals.
and n mnndamus Will be Issued against
the State Auditor of Public Accounts
TO compel payment The formal orders
have not yet been prepared, but win
De entered to-day. Judge Scott an
nouncing his decision in both cases
orally after having heard exhaustive
argument from attorneys on both
sides.
On septcmbcr so the prison board
eiected DR.. Herbert Mann prison
surgeon TO succeed DIR. Darlington from
the end OF the latter's term. that Is.
from january 1 next. The failure II
Dr. Darlington to secure recollection
brought on friction, charges and
countercharSes. and on October 81
tse board summarily removed tho sur
econ rom Office. appointing Dr. w. r.
oppenhimer as surgeon pro TEN.
Has Been Twice Removed.
Through his attorneys. Miles M Mar
tin and Thomasson & Mino- DIR. Car
rihston appealed to the Circuit Court
Oh the city OF Richmond. and secured
mandamus directing his reinstate-
meht on the ground that his removal
nau peen without notice and hearing,
ana SO without due process Of law.
Without conccding the correctness n,
'his decision--in fact. while an appeal
was Pcnding-the board proceeded TO
rectliy its error by serving notice on
Dr' Darlington and proceeding TO n for
maj hearing on December Q, at which
,ime he was for a second time removed.
Dr. Darlington then asked for and was
granted rule requiring the board TO
show cause why the members should
not be punished for CONTEMPT for re-
iusing him admission to the prison and
the right TO perform his duties. In ac-
eordanco with his first Reinstatement.
This rule, after the answer and arsu-
ment FOR the board. Judge Scott yes
terday dismissed.
Both Sides to Appeal
Both sides indicated yesterday their
intention OF appealing-tho State from
the order compelling the Auditor to paw
the surgeons salary to December .
and DR.. Darlington from the Judgment
OF the court in UNFOLDING the validity
OF the so-called trial which resulted
In his removal. 1t seems to be tacitly
admitted that both sides are sparring
FOR an opening In order to have their
cases In hand for presentation 70 a
legislative investigating committee.
which has been asked for by the direc-
tors.
Judge Scott held that the Constitu-
ton and laws of the State give 10 the
Prison Board certain judicial powers.
and that when sitting as a court, and
after duo notice to the party under
trial, 1t was for the board to deter
mine whether tho character Of the evil
dence justified removal. Tho Circuit
Court could properly compel the Prison
board to perform it's duty. but 1t could
not review or reverse any discretion
airy net or call the regularly entered
orders of that board into question.