The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1891-10-18
REV. DIR. LEIGH.

What He Writes About the Preachers
Meeting Wednesday.
To the Editor Of The Gail: AS daily reader
OF and subscriber to your paper am Impressed
with the conviction that its editorial manage
ment is based on honorable principles. l there
fore request the courtesy Of space to correct
some newspaper references to the meeting held
at 3 o'clock in the afternoon Of Wednesday last
In Trinity Protestant Episcopal Church. Learn
ing from your local columns that a meeting oil
The city clergy had been called at that edince 10
add another protest against the contamination
OF the purchase OF The POstOffice s ite chosen by
the proper authorities. and feeling confident that
nine-tenths OF the ministers of San Francisco
would frown on any effort 10 drag the pastors
officially into this unfortunate controversy, at
tended. Who inspired the call knew not, and
/ was not acquainted with any one owning prop
erty on Tie site selected. The Rev. DR.. j. SAM
ders Reed, befoto the organization OF the meet
ing, delivered an elaborate and ingenious argu-
ment ON the prOpTlely OF the clergy unltedly pro
testing against the acceptance OF the selected
property by the officers OF the General Govern
ment, because the whole transaction had an eth-
cal side. / then nominated DR.. Reed for CHAIR
man, aud, seeing no preachers IN attendance, re-
Quested DIR. Reed 10 call on the ministers 10 rise.
A count was made, aud II was ascertaned
that DIR. Reed and The writer were the sole repre-
representatives of the pulpit In that auditorium.
He was elected Chairman and the writer SecTe
tary. then spoke for fifteen minutes against
the wisdom OF having any protest 60 from the
city clergy as a body, and argued 10 make maui
fest the fact that when call for The city clergy
TO assemble is made IL ought 10 be 10 consider
some one OF the tremendous questions that crys-
talliZe about the moral welfare Of San francisco.
What have tho Clergy To do. as body. acting
collectively, with POstOfiice sitesp greatly re-
gTetted the applause that punctuated and fOl-
lowed the address, with the exception OF that
manifested when a tribute was paid to the char
acter and administration OF my erS0ual friend,
the Postmaster General, whose action In the
affair has been so unjustly misrepIesented. II
ma hea c | s'dauOuucPd the Chair
man and pronounced The Site the best 10 the
city" | stated that IN my opinion the Post
office should be near 10 the ferries, where the
great mails arrive" and my only refert nee 10
DIR. Reed or his address was 10 say, "Atler the
brilliant address OF the brilliant rector OF this
church" When closed, the meeting adjourned
By unanimous vote. In the remarks made
competing sites. regarded The one selected as
the equal OF any IN accessibility, price, location
and soil. have not met city pastor up TO
this hour, with the exception OF DIT. Reeo,
who has any sympathy with the clerical protest
proposed. My mail comes to lay house. aud the
location OF tile POstofiice is TO me- personally,
matter OF little concern. But notwithstanding
not propose 10 sit IN silence aud see the ministry
OF this city utilized BY disappointed agents In
real estate or their clients. ! believe That the
closing words OF The address represent the voice
OF the San francisco pastors who were not pI es-
ent, VIZ: I'VE Will act wisely rs preachers aud
laymeu II we promptly decline 10 make the nin-
isteTial protest solicited, and leave the selection
OF a proper POsIoffice size 10 our commercial
bodies, our Senators and Representatives In Con-
gress aud 10 the representative business men OF
San Francisco" With respect, S. Y. LEECH.
San francisco. oct. Il, 1891