The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1913-09-17
Decision Judge Chicestes Gives
Methodist Conferences Right
to Nominate Candidates for
Vacancies on Board
REFUSES INJUNCTION
ASKED BY MINORITY
Unless Appeal is Taken Con-
troversy of Many Years
Standing is Now at End---Be-
gan With Acceptance of Place
on Carnegie Foundation

The injunction restra ming the ma.
jority of the members of the board Of
trustees of the Randolph Macon sys-
tenn from eIeCting the four trustees
nominated by the Methodist confer-
ences of Virginia and Baltimore, which
was obtained by a minority Of the
board, was formally dissolved Nom
day afternoon in an opinion handed
down by Judge Chichester in the Ham
over county Circuit court refusing to
make permanent the injunction grant
ed by Judge r. Carter Scott Unless
the case is appealed this decision set
ties for all time the relationship be-
tween the board of trustees and fhe
conferences of the Methodist church.
The costs of the court were charged
to the plaintiff.
The suit was brought by f. D. New
man and others. minority members OF
the board of trustees, against the
board and Others to enjoin action UNI
der a resolution of the board which
tended tn keep the college specifically
denominationaL This resolution, which
allows the Virginia and Baltimore
conferences to name candidates to fill
the vacancies on the board OF trus-
tees. will stand under the opinion u
Judge Chichester.
ne oEfSittat
The original differences were be-
tween the board of trustees and the
conferences. The board claimed that
il had been -perpetuating and free
from the restraint of the conference.
.WhllG 1ha- latter claimed that II had ala
ways advised in the matter OF naming
new members of the board The mat
ter was discussed during three con-
ferences, the board finally agreeing
that the conference nigh nominate
the new member, but that the board
itself would elect. Although this was
accepted by both board and confer-
ence there were some few men on the
board who still prsisted that the
school and the Church were separate
AID distinct in this particular. and, to
prevent the board electing four new
members under the agreement. Sc
cured n Injunction before Judge Car
ter Scott.
Minority members of the board
II is claimed. opposed to his agree
mcnt in order that the retired
teachers of the school system might
be eligible to receive the benefit of the
Carnegie foundation fund and because
they believed the board had no right
tn delegate any part of it's authority
to the conference.
In this attempt they have lost, ac-
cording to the decision of Judge
Chichester, in whise opinion the
school system IS and has always been
under the support and under the juriS-
diction of the Church.
No Fear of jeopardy.
In rendering the decision Judge
Chichester dissented from the claims
made in the bill that the prosperity Of
the institution might he placed In
jeopardy by the action under the reso-
tuition. He also took exception to
the claim made that the resolution
was at variance to the State charter.
stating that for the conference to nom-
mate men for vacancies did not in
fringe upon the rights of the board OF
trustees To elect the new members.
The resolution, according to thu
opinion of Judge Chichester, is along
the lines which have always been fol-
lowed by an understanding between
the trustees and the conference. This
was adequately expressed, says the
opinion handed down, by the resolu-
ton OF the Georgia and North Caro-
lima conferences that conferences
could nominate members to the board
of trustees Such had been the prac-
tee since early in the history of thes
Methodist Church and the judge cited
Instances where the minutes or vac
rious conferences showed that this
method had been followed.
j
the college system WIS initiated and
conserved by the Methodist Episcopal
Church ar an educational department.
of it's conference work. The confer
ence ell acted the trusted who COM
posed the original board. and that
having obtained the charter II raised
all funds for the new institution. New
trustees were named by the confer
ence and reports OF the college work
were receivd through its officers from
time TO time by the conference. Tho
statement is made that from the very
beginning down to the Carnegie trOu-
Bile in 1905 Randolph Macon was re-
garded alike by the board of trustees.
the legislature and by the Baltimore
and Virginia conferences as being un-
der the patronage and control OF tbs
Church.
Records Show 1t.
In a history Of the relations OF the
conference tn the board OF trustees
of the school system the Judge points
cut that this last statement has ample
proof from the records of the con-
ference meetings. and the minutes OF
the board of trustee sessions. "Sure-
ly no stronger argument could b9
mentioned than that which we have
In the records before u.s." the judge
Is credited with saying In his opin-ss
ION.
These records SAYS the opinion. e.
tablish neyand a peradventure or
doubt that the hoard of trustees havo
always construed the Randolph Macon
college charter az giving 1t the power
10 fully consult the conference which
was responsible for their being. ana
for whatever success attended their
efforts Turing the years OF their exiAr-
ence, and to give them voice by way
of nomination or suggestion, IN thN
E.