"Furthermore," Bennett continued, "A well-run operation is a team operation. A corporation is not a political body. The Overseers are in a sense a political body, in that they are elected. They don't have to be homogeneous."

"The proposal would tend to introduce dissident elements into what is a smooth-running operation," Bennett added. "I think the system they recommended is ridiculous."

In his statement, Pusey said the Corporation voted against Proposal Two because they objected to "restructuring the boards of publicly held corporations along the lines of assemblies whose members represent different types of constituencies."

With its abstention on Proposal Three, Pusey said, the Corporation expressed its "endorsement in principle and doubts as to detail" of Campaign GM's demand that General Motors disclose information on "matters of public concern."

Commenting on the abstention, Michael A. Levett, Loeb Fellow in Advanced Environmental Studies and a coordinator of Campaign GM at Harvard, said, "They're supporting us in principle and Campaign GM in fact. Some day someone is going to convince Harvard that if they believe in something in principle they should do it in fact."

Responding to the objections on "detail," Moore said, "Will Harvard next year help us draft a proposal and introduce a nomination? While they criticize our methods, they never come forward with others."

"Basic figures don't always tell the story," Bennett said, explaining why he opposed the third resolution. "The corporation is already publishing all the information required by law, and more."

"It's a question of having confidence in a management with which one has worked over the years," Bennett said. "You either have confidence in people or you don't."

Bennett said the Corporation objected in particular to the part of the proposal which would have required management to attach the information in question to the annual shareholders' report.

On the South Africa resolution, Pusey said the Corporation would have voted affirmative "if we had thought it would make a significant contribution to the elimination of apartheid in the Republic of South Africa; but since we had no information it would, and since it seems certain it would work hardship on the employees affected, we decided to oppose this proposal."

Bennett said that GM had created jobs for blacks as well as for whites in South Africa. "For GM to shut down would put a lot of blacks out of work," he said.

Although Bennett agreed that blacks generally occupy more menial positions than whites in South Africa, he said, "If you were a black down there, would you rather have no job or a job not as good as a white man's?"

Bennett said he did not think that a pullout by GM would help topple South Africa's apartheid rule.