The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-12-12
Trustees Are Not Concerned
Over Lawyer Phillips"
Charges.
LEGGETT is VERY OUTsPOKEN.
Replies to the Boards Critic and Says
the Institute Is More Prosper.
GUS Than Ever.

The threat of L. Ernest Phillips that he
would go into court and take the trustees
of the Mechanics Institute before the
Grand Jury besides, unless they consented
to order an investigation of the affairs of
that institution, does not appear to have
filled the mem bers of the board with any
marked concern. On the contrary they
announce that they are ready to so into
court or before the Grand Jury and have
their doings investigated. Some OF them
go so far as to pronounce the gentleman
perennial generator of disturbance, and
accuse him of insincerity, and charge that
instead of being actuated by a desire to
promote the welfare of the institution he
is merely seeking notoriety.
Joseph Leggett, one OF the trustees,
spoke very freely concerning Mr.. Phillips
charges. He said:
think Mr.. Phillips is receiving altogether
too much attention, for do not think there is
anything in the management of the institute
that needs investigating.
He is one of a very small number of mem
bers who are opposed to the preferential
method OF electing trustees ana because OF
that fact is forever claiming ii is illegal, and
strives at every opportunity to foment dis
turbanceS
1 am convinced that his predisposition in
this direction and desire to obtain notoriety
at a very cheap rate were MS only motives in
Introducing the resolution that the board
order an investigation OF the affairs OF the
institute. The members voiced their opinion
of the necessity for such action by the vote Oh
his resolution. There were eighty votes against
1t and thirteen for 1t.
l see he claims the trustees refused to order
the Investigation, but the records show that
the members themselves refused by that vote
to have an investigation ordered and that the
trustees had nothing to do with 1t.
Mr.. Leggett referred to the charges that
the preferential method of election was
illegal, ana that by it he and other mem
bers were seeking to perpetuate themselves
in office. He cited the constitution to
prove the legality of the system and
showed that by an amendment to the con-
stitution it had been adopted by the re-
quired two-thirds vote and must therefore
be legal. In relation to the charge that it
enables members of the board to continue
in office Mr.. Leggett said:
1t was to prevent that very thing and keep
the affairs OF the institute out of the hands OF
any one clique or majority faction that the
preferential method was adopted. / will ex-
plain the difference between the majority and
former it is possible for 81 per cent of the
members of the institute to stand together like
political party and always elect their candi-
dates, while under the latter One-seventh of
the members can elect candidate for Office
1t is done this way. There are fourteen trustees
seven are elected every year, and, according 10
the preferential system, one-seventh of the
members voting for one man constitute a
quota OF election. For example, suppose there
were 100 members and five trustees were to be
elected. II twenty OF the members vote for one
man he must be declared elected. You will
see that it would be simply apostolic for any
one clique or faction TO get control OF affairs,
or for any one man TO promote his personal
interests.
1 have never been q member of any
body OF men whom | believed to be more
honorable or publ spirited than the trustees
Of the Mechanics Institute, and L do not be-