The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-11-16
LEGAL INTELLIGENCB.
The GirRrd College Case Injunction
Refuaed.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAs-Judges Allison
and Brewster.-1hs morning Judge Allison delivered
the following opinion, dsIosing OF the Grard College
Richard somers Smith VS.. Charles E. Lex, James ].
Boswell e dL Directors OF Girard College, and VII
The bill filed by the complanants prays:--
First. That II shall be decreed that the Board OF
the President Of College except tor assigned
secoL d. That the removal OF the complainant with
Thiio, That the choice OF William ii. Allen as Pre-
was vacancy and because he was chosen through
The biIl charges that soma of the defendants In
trigued % have complainant removed from his Office
day OF May 1888 ana abored to procure the election
OF persons as Directors Of said College pledged 10 effect
and Gall gave such pledges. 80,
the eGmplanant and assignn1ent ofimproper motives
which are set up as evidence of intrigue and o. cor
TSP6 & e5 * OF PSTer SSd Go9dsd @ TO
Will of Mr.. Girard.
These charges OF corrupt combination, intrigue
complainant denied in the afidavirs of those of
the defendants who voted the l1th day of SepJem
br last in favor OF declaring the office OF President
1867, and by whose vote w. IL. Allen was elected
These defendants all affirm that they acted In good
den Smith was necessary for the best Interests OF the
IT is also denied that at the time of the election of
complainant any promise or assurance was given to
the office OF President OF the College through life,
The adavits read in answer to this application for
q special Injunction deny all the material charges OF
intrigue, conspiracy, corrupt motive, and promise
assui an ce gwen to complainant; and if the motion
to be Of aS upon 10 these he s sue
cations il they constitute such an equity as would
special nunction are completely set aside by these
Il is equally clear that the first two prayers for
reliei are answered by the presentation by the com
exhibit contains a specification of the reasons which
Induced the passage OF the resolution declaring the
TS the Sea 6 Of the the Ges has nS
under its care, reasonable respect for the inte
rests and feelings Of their relatives and friends
That the Injunction Of the founder TO form and
foster pure attachment to republican institutions
And that the Institution should be SO managed "as
The wishes and intentions Of the drectOTs as eS
pressed by their resolutions adopted from time to
time BY the code of rules made for the
port of his the evidence that his removal tor
The cause assigns In the preamble 70 the resolution
general principles do we think It material that his
President OF the College being a minlst rial Office,
and not Of the essence OF the corporation A
piSedo may be removed without any other
him is determned In these cases the right to re-
move Il incidental e the right Of appointment VIII
even where the appointment IS "for life" "dnring
Bridge show, 7oi Rex vs. Canterbury, Il Modern,
! 4OS; s. T., Strange, 674
/ not entitled TO notice. ana II those who have the
Itself an amOtion of the former oficer Without de-
clRratiOn of his amotOn. So far has this doctrine
been extended that IL has been held that would not
/ were under the Impression that they electing
him to a vacancy and would not have voted for the
Rmotlon OF his predecessor-lS Strange ll4i Cowper,
The only question which remains is as to the power
| of the Directors of the College, under the tOAt OF
Stephen GrRrd to remove an officer Of the institu-
| general principle must give way. Such power is
denied to the Directors by the ayerments OF the bill
and II Is upon this ground, chiefly, that we are asked
restrain by special Injunction the urther action OF
the defendants relation to the removal OF the
plalnant, and the installation OF William III. Allen
as his successor. - 80 -
of The city or Philadelphia we entertained a doubt OF
the power the Directors OF the College TO
the OF the Institution at the discretion of the
Directors Woulo, notwithstanding such doubt, be
| compelled to refuse special injunction, regarding
| the question no longer open one upon the
authority of Field VS. Haines Legal HteIIi0eneer OF
This case settles the law upon the proposition now
| under consideration conclusiVely against the COM
plainant and has given a construction 20 that por:
the present notion 1t Is binding authority on this
Court and requires US TO refuse the special injunction
PiJ1der The ordinance of the city of Philadelphia OF
September 49, lS47, the Directors are authorized TO
elect the following officers Instructors and agents for
the Institutions who shall severally hold their Offices
during the pleasure Of the said Directors The ordi-
nance then makes provision In the same section the
s1t tn for the election of President. matron and a
steward defines their duties and fixes their compen-
The seventh section authorizes the election of fe-
| male teachers ana governesseH.
| The eighth provides for the election OF physlcans
and the ninth section provides that IN ADDITION 70
the foregoing officers teachers, governesses and ply
sicians" the Directors may employ lanitOr. gar
! dener, aad servants.