Final Report of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Commission

by Louisiana Purchase Exposition Commission

PROGRAMME

STATE DAY, MAY 2, 1903.

The civic parade assembled at 10.30 a.m. under direction of Col. Eugene J. Spencer, marshal of the day, and moved from the junction of Grand avenue and Lindell boulevard through Forest Park to the exposition grounds, where the parade was reviewed by the governors of the States.

At 1.30 p. m. the audience assembled in the Liberal Arts Building. The assembly was called to order by Mr. William H. Thompson, chairman of the committee on grounds and buildings, and the following programme was carried out:

First. Invocation by Rev. William R. Harper:

Our Father which art in Heaven, whose work for man no man knows,
whose heart is full of wisdom, to Thee be our prayers directed.
Hallowed be Thy name. Thou art the pure and the very great. May
Thy peace be manifested to us in all Thy work.

Give us this day our daily bread, and for the following day. Forgive us our sins, as well as forgive them that sin against us. Take away all hatred and strife and whatever prejudice may hinder us from union and concord. Let us be under one bond of faith and peace.

Show us Thy kindness and so fill us with Thy goodness that our souls may be filled with the manifold delights of charity and good will. Let nations abide under Thy law, for Thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory. Amen.

Second. Address by Mr. William Lindsay, of the National Commission, president of the day, as follows:

MR. PRESIDENT AND LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: This is the last day of the interesting and memorable ceremonies with which the great exposition has been inaugurated. We have had with us the chief representative of the people. The next day we had with us the diplomats, the representatives of foreign climes. To-day we have with us the toilers. We have had the governors of the sovereign States which make up this great Union. When I beheld the great cavalcade I felt that the time had almost come when the industries will solely be confined to working for peace and divorced from devotion to the implements of war.

It is not merely a question of a fair profit upon money that is uppermost before the people to-day. It is not the question of a fair return for labor. But it is the question of equitable distribution of the products of labor and of the surplus of capital. This is the great question; that is what involves the happiness of mankind, and the man who solves that question will rise in greatness to such a point that other statesmen, or even Presidents, will pale into insignificance.

This is labor day, and as such we should honor it.

And the governors. We had governors before ever we had a President. Each State represents yet a great residuum of power. In the hands of State are the life and liberty of the people. We must remember that the governors, representing the unit of the national power, have the first place in national precedence.

There is on the right of me the governor of the great Empire State of the Atlantic. There is on the left of me the governor of the great Empire State of the Louisiana Purchase. I need not introduce to you the governor of Missouri, but it is upon the programme, and hence I will say the words—I beg to introduce Governor A.M. Dockery, who will now address you.

Third. Address of welcome by Hon. A.M. Dockery, governor of Missouri, as follows:

The pleasing duty devolves upon me of extending a cordial greeting in behalf of the people of Missouri to you as the chief magistrates and representatives of sister States, who come with kindly messages and substantial evidence of the nation's interest in our stupendous undertaking. The work already completed and yet to be done could only be accomplished by a people known and respected as the incarnation of intelligent, ennobling enterprise.

The occasion which will bring us together is the precursor of the most marvelous exhibition the world has ever seen. The wealth, the ingenuity, the forethought, and the ability of all nations will contribute to this magnificent result. The masterful statesmanship of Thomas Jefferson builded better than even he could know when he purchased from the Emperor Napoleon this vast domain—the connecting link between the fair country skirting the Atlantic coast, which had only been recently emancipated from despotic rule, and the rich possession on our west, extending to the Pacific Ocean.

The Mississippi River marks the eastern limit of this priceless acquisition. Sweeping away to the west, the south, and the north, its area of 14 States and Territories embraces great cities, beautiful towns and villages, farms and gardens, mighty waterways, vast railway systems, and a wealth of gold, silver, and other resources which a wise Providence provided for His people. Can the mind of man conceive a more resplendent territory? And when it is remembered that the Louisiana Purchase States are only a part of the still more glorious whole, is it any wonder that the American people are proud of their country and true to their Government?

Nature, with regal prodigality, has lavished gifts on this fair land, and its people are especially endowed with those qualifications which can not fail to produce the greatest excellence in everything.

But to return to the coming exposition. Everywhere during this pageant of entertainment have we seen evidences of the progress of this enterprise so mighty in its conception as to be astounding. Sites have been assigned to each State and foreign country, and the result already accomplished is spread out before you in brilliant panorama. There is no longer any question about anything but the magnitude of the success of the undertaking. This has been made possible only by the intelligent cooperation of all the people, and to you, as representatives of sister States, I extend most grateful acknowledgment.

The selection of our own metropolitan city as the proper place in which to hold this exposition seems peculiarly fitting. Its very name breathes the spirit of its French ancestry to whom we are so greatly indebted, and its geographical situation is preeminently satisfactory.

To guard our shores, to make impregnable our southern border against foreign assault, and to enlarge the scope of our commerce and liberty was the controlling thought of Thomas Jefferson and his compatriots when the "Purchase Territory" was added to the American Union. Fifteen millions of dollars represented the purchase price, and by a happy coincidence which may not have been altogether accidental, $15,000,000 represented the basic sum by which this exposition first became possible—$5,000,000 contributed by the city of St. Louis, $5,000,000 raised by popular subscription, and $5,000,000 given by the National Government. Missouri has since appropriated $1,000,000, that her resources may be fittingly exploited, while your States have in turn liberally set apart amounts which will lend the magnificence of their products to the scene.

To-day closes the celebration incident to the dedicatory exercises of the exposition, and in the hour of greeting we are reminded that soon we must part for a time. The panoply of war in the execution of our regular and citizen soldiery has joined with the pomp and pageantry of civil life. Their commingling is further proof of the pride of the people in all the institutions of our country. Civilian and soldier have given the weight of their influence to make more impressive the scenes attendant on this display, and will be equally enthusiastic when the gates of the great exhibition are formally opened. Months will pass before that event, but in the meantime an army of the employed will perfect the scheme which, in its full fruition, will herald abroad the triumph of this wonderful exposition.

In conclusion, permit me to say, the welcome of every true Missourian is yours, and in parting a cordial adieu is wafted with the hope expressed for a safe return to your homes and to your people.

Fourth. Music by the Marine Band.

Fifth. Response by Hon. Benj. B. Odell, jr., governor of New York, as follows:

The past, with all of its achievements, with all its successes, is to us but an incentive and guide for the future progress of our country. America still beckons to the oppressed of all lands and holds out the gifts of freedom, and we at this time and upon this occasion should renew our adherence to those policies which have made us a great nation. The future is before us, and the patriotism and self-sacrifice of those who made the country's history so glorious should be an Inspiration to us for all higher ideals of citizenship. Through the golden gates of commerce pours an unceasing stream of immigration which must be amalgamated with American ideas and American principles.

The battles of the past have been for freedom and liberty, and the struggle of the future will be for their preservation, not, however, by force of arms, but through the peaceful methods which come through the education of our people. The declaration which brought our Republic into existence has insured and guaranteed that liberty of conscience and that freedom of action which does not interfere, with the prerogatives or privileges of a man's neighbors.

Capital and labor are the two great elements upon which the prosperity and happiness of our people rest, and when, therefore, aggregations of the one are met by combinations of the other, it should be the aim of all to prevent the clashing of these great interests. The products of toil are worthless unless there be some means by which they can be substituted or transferred for that which labor requires. The concrete form in which these transactions are conducted is the money power or the capital of the land.

Without work all of these fertile fields, these teeming towns, would have been impossible; and without a desire to benefit and elevate humanity, its onward progress would have been useless. To work, to labor, is man's bounden duty, and in the performance of the tasks which have been placed upon him he should be encouraged, and his greatest incentive should be the knowledge that he may transmit to his children and his children's children a higher civilization and greater advantages than he himself possessed.

Trade conditions which would permit to the toiler but a bare sustenance, the bare means of a livelihood, would be a hindrance to human progress, a hindrance not to be removed by all of the maxims of the philosopher or the theories of the doctrinaire.

Promise without fulfillment is barren, but when you can place before the mechanic the assured fact that the performance of his duty means success in life, and that his nonperformance means failure; when you can show him that this law is immutable, you have made of him a useful citizen and have instilled into his mind a firm belief that the freedom and liberty of which we boast is not an inchoate substance to be dreamed of and not enjoyed.

But this desired result can not be secured if combinations of capital, which produce the necessaries of life cheaper and better, are assailed as the enemies of mankind. There is always a mean between those who seek only a fair recompense and return for that which they produce and those who seek undue advantages for the few at the expense of the many. The laws which have been enacted, if properly executed, are sufficient in their force and effort to encourage the one and to punish the other, but in our condemnation let us not forget that with the expansion that has come to our country an expansion of our business relations is also necessary.

This growth has brought us into intimate contact with the markets of the world, and in the struggle that is always before us the competition of trade, if we are to hold our own among the world's producers, we should encourage, not hinder, those who, by their energy, their capital, and their labor, have banded together for the purpose of meeting these new conditions—problems which our individual efforts alone can not solve, but which require the concentrated force and genius of both capital and labor.

Incentive for good citizenship would indeed be lacking if these were taken from us—the opportunities for development, the opportunities for the young man to follow in the footsteps of those who have written their names in the history of our country as the great captains of industry.

Success will always follow perseverance and genius. Every heresy, every doctrine which would teach the young man of this country differently, is an insult to the intelligence of our people, and is in the direction of building up a dangerous element in American society which in time would threaten not only the peace and prosperity we enjoy, but our very institutions themselves.

When you have placed before the young man all of his possibilities, you have made it impossible to make of our Republic a plutocracy controlled by the few at the expense of the many. The individual should count for as much as the aggregation of individuals, because an injury to the one will lead to the destruction of the many.

The question of adjusting and harmonizing the relations of capital and labor is the problem before us to-day, and is one which will become more urgent in the future. Its solution must be along those lines of constitutional right which every citizen has been guaranteed.

Every man is entitled, in the prosecution of his work, to the broadest possible liberty of action and the protection of law—of that law which is the outgrowth of necessity and which seeks to encourage and not to oppress. Such recognition can always be secured if there is a determination upon the part of those charged with the responsibility of government to have it. And who is not?

Every man possessed of a ballot is responsible and has the power not only to formulate, but to criticise and punish as well. If the right be properly exercised, an honest and efficient administration of our affairs can always be secured.

The greatest solvent for political heresies, for doctrines which are antagonistic to popular government, is education. To the educated mind there comes a conception of duty which is not possible to the ignorant.

Sixth. Grand chorus.

Seventh. Benediction by Rabbi Leon Harrison:

Unto Thee, Almighty God, the God of Moses, the God of Jesus, the God of Mohammed, and the God of every living creature, God of the church, of the mosque, and of the synagogue, unto Thee we bring homage and praise.

We worship Thee in this temple of labor, reared by faithful hands, and implore Thy benediction on the work, for, unless the Lord blesses the house, the labor is in vain. May it be dedicated to the enlightenment of humanity that brotherhood may be increased and patriotism deepened.

Bless this august assembly. Bless this great cause, its tireless leaders, and faithful workers, and above all bless our beloved country, the haven of the oppressed and the home of liberty. Bless its rulers and its people.

May it go on as from the beginning, from strength to strength, that the nation and the Government may increase in power and in the end be a union of all mankind, all races, all nations, proclaiming one God, one law of righteousness, one humanity, and saying Thy God shall reign from generation to generation. Amen.

Eighth. Centennial salute of 100 guns.

A grand display of daylight fireworks took place at the conclusion of the exercises in the building.

Immediately after the close of the ceremonies in the Liberal Arts Building, the governors present proceeded to the building sites selected for their respective States, where corner stones were laid and State colors were raised with appropriate ceremonies.

The lady managers of the exposition were conducted by military escort in advance of the parade each day to the reviewing stand. They were accompanied by the wives of the members of the Diplomatic Corps, members of the Supreme Court of the United States, members of the Cabinet, members of the Joint Committee of Congress, the Admiral of the Navy, the Lieutenant-General of the Army, the grand marshal, the governors of the States, the officiating clergymen, and members of the National Commission.

Receptions were held each day by the board of lady managers during the progress of the dedication ceremonies.

The magnificence of the spectacle will live long in the memories of the hundreds of thousands of people who witnessed the ceremonies.

All the nations were present by their diplomatic and accredited representatives.

The presence of Theodore Roosevelt, President of the United States, and of Grover Cleveland, his only living predecessor in office, intensified the interest of the vast concourse of people at the dedication ceremonies. Their addresses were listened to by 80,000 persons assembled in the Liberal Arts Building.

The committees appointed by the respective Houses of Congress to attend the dedication ceremonies consisted of the following Senators and Representatives:

Committee of the Senate.—Messrs. Burnham, New Hampshire;
Depew, New York; Penrose, Pennsylvania; Dolliver, Iowa;
Hansbrough, North Dakota; Mitchell, Oregon; Teller, Colorado;
Berry, Arkansas; Martin, Virginia; Foster, Louisiana.

Committee of the House of Representatives.—Messrs. Jas. A.
Tawney, Jas. S. Sherman, Thad. M. Mahon, Richard Bartholdt, H.
C. Van Voorhis, Richard W. Parker, Jesse Overstreet, Jas. R.
Mann, Walter I. Smith, Jas. M. Miller, E.J. Burkett, S.M.
Robertson, C.L. Bartlett, John F. Shafroth, Jas. Hay.

Special rules and regulations providing for an international jury and governing the system of awards, which had been in course of preparation by the Commission and the Exposition Company for some time, were finally drafted and sent to the Commission for approval on May 2, 1902. As approved by the Commission and subsequently promulgated the rules read as follows:

UNIVERSAL EXPOSITION, ST. LOUIS, 1904, COMMEMORATING THE ACQUISITION OF LOUISIANA TERRITORY.

1. The total number of jurors in the international jury of awards shall be approximately 2 per cent of the total number of exhibitors, but not in excess of that number, and each nation having 50 exhibitors or more shall be entitled to representation on the jury. The number of jurors from each art or industry and for each nationality represented shall, as far as practicable, be proportional to the number of exhibitors and the importance of the exhibits.

Of this selected body of international jurors three graded juries will be constituted: One, the general organization of group juries; two, department juries; three, a superior jury.

2. Each group jury shall be composed of jurors and alternates.

The number of alternates shall in no case exceed one-fourth of the number of jurors, and they shall have a deliberative voice and vote only when occupying the places of absent jurors.

3. The United States jurors and alternates of the group juries shall be nominated by the chiefs of departments to which the respective groups belong. The jurors and alternates of the group juries representing foreign countries and the United States insular possessions shall be nominated by the commissioners of such countries.

The Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company shall certify to the board of lady managers the number of groups in which the exhibits have been produced in whole or in part by female labor; to each of the groups so certified the board of lady managers may appoint one juror and one alternate to that juror; such appointees, when confirmed, shall have the privileges and be amenable to the regulations provided for other jurors and alternates.

All the above nominations shall be made not later than August 1, 1904, except that nominations made to fill vacancies may be made at any subsequent time.

Jury nominations made by commissioners of foreign countries
shall be forwarded to the president of the Louisiana Purchase
Exposition Company.

Nominations made by chiefs of departments and by the board of
lady managers shall be submitted to the director of exhibits,
and when approved he shall transmit them to the president of the
Exposition Company.

The nomination of group jurors and alternates, when approved by the president of the exposition, shall be transmitted to the president of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Commission for the approval of that body.

These nominations having been considered and confirmed by the authorities, as provided by section 6 of the act of Congress relating to the approval of the awarding of premiums, the appointments to the international jury shall be made in accordance with section 6 of Article XXII of the official rules and regulations of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company.

4. Each group jury shall choose its own officers, consisting of a chairman, a vice-chairman, and a secretary.

Of the two first-named officers one shall be a citizen of the United States and the other shall be from a foreign country represented in the division of exhibits.

5. The chief of each department shall have general charge of the organization and direction of the group of juries in his department for the purpose of securing the proper examinations of all exhibits and to see that the work laid out for the juries is conducted strictly in accordance with the official rules and regulations.

He shall be admitted to all sessions of these juries for the purpose of directing their attention to matters relating to the judging of exhibits.

6. The work of the group juries shall begin September 1, 1904, and shall be completed not later than twenty days thereafter.

Examinations or other work not completed in the time specified
herein will be transferred to the department jury.

7. Group juries may, on the recommendation of the chiefs of their respective departments, and with the approval of the director of exhibits, have authority to appoint, as associates or experts, one or more persons especially skilled in matters submitted for examination. These experts shall participate only in such special work as they are selected to perform and shall have no vote on the question of the merit of the exhibit under consideration.

8. Each group jury shall carefully examine all exhibits pertaining to the group to which it has been assigned. It shall also consider and pass upon the merits of the collaborators whose work may be conspicuous in the design, development, or construction of the exhibits.

The jury shall prepare separate lists presenting the names of such exhibitors as are out of competition, awards recommended to exhibitors in order of merit, awards recommended to collaborators in order of merit, a report giving an account of the most important objects exhibited, and a general account of the group as a whole.

These papers shall be certified to the chief of the department to which the group belongs, and the chief of the department shall certify the same, with such recommendations as he may deem advisable, to the department jury.

9. In order to expedite their work group juries may be divided into committees for the examination of exhibits.

These committees shall be governed by paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 of rule 8, just cited; when they have completed the work assigned them they shall report to the full jury, which shall review the findings after an inspection of all the exhibits in the group.

10. When the exigencies of the work require such procedure, and when recommended by a chief of a department and approved by the director of exhibits, two or more group juries may be combined.

11. In the case of temporary exhibits and such other exhibits as are developed through a considerable period of time, or which for other reasons can not be governed by the time limits prescribed, the juries of such groups may continue in service throughout the entire period of the exposition. Special juries may be formed when urgently needed for special occasions.

At the close of each temporary exhibit or competition the jury having the same in charge shall prepare a list of awards proposed in order of merit and shall certify the same to the chief of the department to which the exhibit pertains.

Special awards for such temporary exhibits or competitions may be provided by the chief of the department to which the exhibits belong, on the approval of the director of exhibits and the president of the Exposition Company.

12. Each department jury shall be composed of the chairman and vice-chairman of the group juries of the respective departments, with one member of the directory of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, to be named by the president of the company, and one person appointed by the board of lady managers.

The department juries shall choose their own officers,
consisting of a chairman, three vice-chairmen, and a secretary.

The chairman and first vice-chairman shall be, one a citizen of
the United States, and the other a citizen of a foreign country.

The secretary may be selected by the members of the jury from a
list of persons recommended by the director of exhibits.

13. Each department jury shall complete its organization and
begin its work on September 20, 1904.

The duties of these juries shall be to consider carefully and review the reports of the group juries; to harmonize any differences that may exist between the recommendations of the several group juries as to awards, and to adjust all awards recommended so that they will be consistent with the rules and regulations.

No more than ten days may be devoted to this work, and when the awards recommended by the group juries have been adjusted, the department juries shall, through the chiefs of their respective departments, submit their findings to the director of exhibits, who shall, within five days after the receipt thereof, certify the same to the superior jury, including such work as may have been left incomplete by the department jury.

14. The officers and members of the superior jury shall be as follows: President, the president of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company; first vice-president, the director of exhibits; second vice-president, a citizen of the United States to be named by the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Commission. The members of the jury shall further consist of the commissioners-general of the nine foreign countries occupying with exhibits the largest amounts of space in the exhibit palaces; the chairman and first vice-chairman of the department juries; the chiefs of the exhibit departments, and one person appointed by the board of lady managers.

Two additional vice-presidents and such other officers as may be required shall be elected by the superior jury from the members herein provided for.

No chief of a department shall represent more than a single department. The president of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company shall appoint from the United States membership of the department juries such other members as may be necessary to give to each exhibit department of the exposition a representative on the superior jury.

There shall also be a secretary of the superior jury, who may be selected by the members of the jury from a list of persons recommended by the president of the jury.

15. The superior jury shall determine finally and fully the
awards to be made to exhibitors and collaborators in all cases
that are formally presented for its consideration.

Formal notification of the awards shall, in each case, be sent by the president of the jury to the exhibitors at the place of their respective exhibits.

If, for any reason, an award is not satisfactory to an exhibitor, he may file written notice to that effect with the president of the jury within three days after the date of the official notification of the award; and this notice shall be followed, within seven days after said date, by a written statement setting forth at length his views as to wherein the award is inconsistent or unjust.

In the adjustment of differences and in considering the recommendations of the department juries, the superior jury may provide for hearings of members of the department jury and of exhibitors, but in no case shall it be required to consider matters which have not been regularly presented as heretofore provided.

16. The work of the superior jury shall be completed on October 15, 1904, and, as soon as practicable thereafter, formal public announcement of the awards shall be made. A final complete list of awards shall be published by the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, in accordance with the provisions of section 6 of the act of Congress, and section 6, Article XXII, of the rules and regulations.

17. A committee, consisting of the president and the four vice-presidents of the superior jury, shall continue the work of the superior jury as long as may be found necessary after that jury has disbanded.

This committee shall have charge of the preparation, collection, and publication of the official list of awards and shall make the necessary provisions for the proper distribution of the awards.

18. The deliberations of all juries shall be strictly secret.

The president of the Exposition Company, the director of exhibits, and the chiefs of departments shall have the privilege of attending any sessions of the several juries.

A majority of any jury shall, in all cases, render and confirm a decision.

19. The exhibits of persons serving as jurors or alternates over groups embracing their exhibits shall be classed as noncompetitive and shall not be examined by the juries. This rule applies to managers, agents, or others representing a company or corporation which is entered as an exhibitor. It does not, however, apply to the officers or representatives of governments which are entered as exhibitors.

20. Each regular exhibitor may receive an award, although his exhibit be joined with that of others in a single installation.

Only one award shall be given to a collective exhibit, but the names of all the contributors to such collective exhibit may be entered on the diplomas awarded, and each participant shall receive a copy.

If so desired by a group of exhibitors, a single award may be made to an individual representing such group.

21. An exhibit shall receive only one award in any group.

The same object, shown in several groups and adjudged by more than one jury, shall be entitled only to the highest award accorded to it.

An exhibitor who has different objects entered as exhibits in different groups may be given an award in each group.

22. Exhibitors who desire to have their exhibits excluded from competition shall notify the chief of department as to their wishes when making application for space, giving their reasons at length for their request and objections to a competitive exhibit; and these papers shall be transmitted through the directory of exhibits to the president of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company with such recommendations as may be deemed necessary. Exhibits thus exempted from competition shall not be examined by the juries, and shall not be entitled to official recognition in connection with the system of awards.

23. In addition to the awards prescribed for exhibitors, an award may also be made to the inventor, designer, or artisan, who, as collaborator, has, in the judgment of the jury, shown more than ordinary skill in connection with an exhibit. A collaborator is a person who has distinguished himself as the designer or producer of remarkable objects shown at the exposition. He is not a person who has merely aided in the arrangement or installation of exhibits.

In order that this may be equitably accomplished, each exhibitor who has received an award may furnish the chief of his respective department, for transmission to the proper jury, a list of the names of his collaborators, arranged in order of merit, based on skill, ability, magnitude and value of work, and length of service. It will then remain for the jury of awards to determine whether the assistance rendered by the persons named in the manner described has been sufficient to entitle them, or any of them, to the rank of collaborator, and to name the award which may be conferred therefor.

24. Whenever it is applicable, a decimal scale system shall be used in judging the merits of exhibits, 100 representing perfection; and as a suggestion to juries, for instance, in commercial exhibits, the following is offered:

(a) Value of the product, process, machine or device, as measured by its usefulness, its beneficent influence on mankind in its physical, mental, moral, and educational aspects. Counting not to exceed 25.

(b) Skill and ingenuity displayed in the invention, construction, and application. Counting not to exceed 25.

(c) Merits of the installation as to the ingenuity and taste displayed, the cost and value as an exposition attraction. Counting not to exceed 10.

(d) Magnitude of the business represented, as measured by the gross sales during the calendar year preceding the opening of the exposition. Counting not to exceed 10.

(e) Quality or cheapness, with reference to the possession by the exhibit of the highest possible quality, or the fact that the article is sold at so low a price with reference to its quality as to make it a valuable acquisition to the purchaser. Counting not to exceed 10.

(f) For completion of installation within required time and for excellence of maintenance. Counting not to exceed 10.

(g) Length of time exhibitor has been in business as showing whether exhibit is a development of original invention or is an improvement on the work of some prior inventor. Counting not to exceed 5.

(h) Number and character of awards received from former expositions. Counting not to exceed 5.

25. A special award, consisting of a gold medal in each department, may be recommended by the department jury for the best, most complete, and most attractive installation.

26. The following scale of markings shall be used in determining the final merits of an exhibit and fixing the award that should be made, 100 being used as indicating perfection:

Exhibits receiving markings ranging from 60 to 74 inclusive,
bronze medal.

Exhibits receiving markings ranging from 75 to 84 inclusive,
silver medal.

Exhibits receiving markings ranging from 85 to 94 inclusive,
gold medal.

Exhibits receiving markings ranging from 95 to 100 inclusive,
grand prize.

27. The diplomas or certificates of award for exhibitors shall be signed by the president of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, the president of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Commission, the secretary of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, the director of exhibits, and the chief of the department to which the exhibit pertains.

28. Special commemorative medals and diplomas may be issued to the officers of the exposition, to the United States, State, and foreign commissioners, to the members of the international jury of awards, and to such other persons as may be deemed worthy of special recognition.

29. The compensation of foreign jurors shall be fixed and paid by the countries which they respectively represent.

30. United States jurors, except such as are officers and employees of the exposition, shall receive actual cost of necessary transportation, and compensation at the rate of $7 per day for such time as they are actually engaged in the work assigned them at the exposition.

DAVID R. FRANCIS,
President.

FREDERICK J.V. SKIFF.
Director of Exhibits.

APPROVED.
THOMAS H. CARTER,
President Louisiana Purchase Exposition Commission.

ATTEST:
WALTER B. STEVENS.
Secretary Louisiana Purchase Exposition.

The Commission early experienced great inconvenience in preparing and submitting its monthly reports, as required by law, to the President of the United States, of the financial condition of the exposition, owing to delay in receiving monthly statements from the company and the incomplete nature of such statements when received.

From an examination of the reports furnished by the Exposition Company, it will be observed that they were at all times deficient in that they did not show the outstanding liabilities of the company. The Commission assiduously endeavored to secure such amendment to the books of account kept by the company as would secure the incorporation of a statement of such outstanding liabilities.

The following correspondence between the Commission and the Exposition Company shows the repeated efforts of the Commission to obtain the information essential to the preparation of the monthly reports referred to:

OCTOBER 3, 1902.

DEAR SIR: I am directed by the Commission to refresh your memory as to our conversation yesterday with regard to furnishing a statement of all outstanding liabilities of the Exposition Company.

Section 11 of the act of Congress, approved March 3, 1901, requires the Commission to furnish the President of the United States a summary of the financial condition of the Exposition Company, and this can not be done in a satisfactory manner without a statement of outstanding liabilities under contract, expressed or implied.

It is the desire of the Commission to furnish the President with detailed information of the character indicated, in connection with the report for the current month, to the end that he may have complete data available for consideration in connection with his message to Congress.

It will greatly oblige the Commission to have the statement referred to furnished in duplicate.

Yours, very truly, THOMAS H. CARTER, President.

Hon. D.R. FRANCIS, President Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, City.

ST. Louis, U.S.A., October 15, 1902.

DEAR SIR: In reply to your letter of October 3 with respect to a summary of the financial condition of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, I desire to say that the attention of the proper officers of the company has been called to this request of your part, and I may assure you that the desired information will be prepared and furnished at an early date.

Yours, truly, D.R. FRANCIS, President.

Hon. THOMAS H. CARTER, President National Commission, St. Louis, Mo.

ST. Louis, U.S.A., November 1, 1902.

DEAR SIR: I am directed by President Francis to transmit to you the following information of the total receipts and disbursements of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company to November 1, 1902:

As shown by the report of the treasurer, the collections on account of subscriptions to the capital stock to November 1, 1902, amount to $2,478,030.83.

The treasurer has received from the city of St. Louis the proceeds of the sale of $5,000,000 in bonds, said sale having been made in June, 1902, at a price slightly above par.

The total disbursements to November 1, 1902, as shown by the
books of the treasurer, amount to $21,284,141.01.

The outstanding obligations and contracts, including
disbursements to November 1, 1902, amount to $6,931,853.41.

There is in the hands of the treasurer, November 1, 1902, the
sum of $5,193,889.82.

Respectfully,
W.B. STEVENS,
Secretary.

Mr. JOSEPH FLORY,
Secretary Louisiana Purchase Exposition Commission.

ST. Louis, U.S.A., November 26, 1902.

DEAR SIR: By direction of the Commission I respectfully call your attention to the following entry in the minutes of the proceedings at a meeting of the Commission held on October 2, 1902, as follows:

"President Francis was requested by the Commission to furnish a detailed statement of all outstanding contract obligations and other liabilities of the exposition for transmission to the President of the United States with the monthly report for the current month. He said the statement would be furnished the Commission as requested."

The statement referred to was not furnished to the Commission for transmission to the President of the United States with the monthly statement for the month of October. Presumably this default occurred because of your inability to have the statement prepared in season for transmission with that report. It is deemed by the Commission absolutely essential that the statement should be transmitted with the report for the month of November, to the end that it may be on file and available for examination by the President or by Congress.

You are, therefore, respectfully requested to furnish such detailed statement to the Commission at the earliest practicable date, to the end that it may be examined during the present meeting of the Commission.

The Commission desires that the statement should show the contract obligations for the several buildings, the names of the contractors, the dates fixed for payment, the amounts heretofore paid, and the date for final completion of each structure. Also all contracts existing requiring the payment of money for the acquisition of grounds and improvements to be made thereon, and for services rendered, or to be rendered, together with the amounts heretofore paid on the respective contracts, and the names of the contractors to whom payments have been or are to be made. In short, it is the desire of the Commission that the statement should give the substance of each and every contract for the payment of money made by the Exposition Company prior to November 1.

The Commission also desires that the statement should embrace an approximate estimate of the cost of all contemplated construction, improvements, and necessary expenditures connected with the exposition as contemplated by the plan and scope thereof heretofore approved.

The Commission deems the statement referred to necessary under the requirements of section 11 of the act of Congress approved March 3, 1901, which requires the Commission to give a general summary of the financial condition of the exposition.

The Commission will appreciate the courtesy of the statement in duplicate.

Very respectfully,
THOS. H. CARTER,
President.

Hon. D.R. FRANCIS,
President Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company,
St. Louis, Mo.

ST. LOUIS, November 26, 1902.

DEAR SIR: I beg to acknowledge receipt of a communication dated
November 26, signed by President Carter, requesting a detailed
statement of the financial obligations and expenditures of the
Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company up to and including
October 31, 1902.

Respectfully,
W.B. STEVENS,
Secretary.

Hon. JOSEPH FLORY,
Secretary National Commission, City.

ST. LOUIS, U.S.A., November 26, 1902.

DEAR SIR: I send herewith a statement of the disbursements and
liabilities of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, which,
I think, meets the request made by the National Commission.

Respectfully,
D.R. FRANCIS,
President.

Hon. THOMAS H. CARTER,
President National Commission, St. Louis.

ST. LOUIS, November 29, 1902.

DEAR SIR: I send herewith the financial statement and duplicate
duly certified in accordance with the request of the National
Commission.

Respectfully,
W.B. STEVENS,
Secretary.

FEBRUARY 5, 1903.

DEAR SIR: Referring to conversation had with you this morning, relative to the detailed statement of disbursements and liabilities transmitted this Commission each month, I wish to say that the statement does not furnish all the information requested.

By reference to letter addressed President Francis by President Carter under date of November 26, 1902, on the second page of which you will note this Commission desires a statement showing the contract obligations for the several buildings, the name of the contractors, the dates fixed for payment, the amounts heretofore paid, and the date for final completion of each structure. Also all contracts existing requiring the payment of money for the acquisition of grounds and improvements to be made thereon, and for services rendered or to be rendered, together with the amounts heretofore paid on the respective contracts, and the names of the contractors to whom payments have been or are to be made, giving the substance of each and every contract for the payment of money made by the Exposition Company prior to November 1. If you could have the statement include the months of November, December, and January it would be appreciated.

You will also note that it is desired that the statement should embrace an approximate estimate of the cost of all contemplated construction, improvements, and necessary expenditures connected with the exposition, as contemplated by the plan and scope thereof heretofore approved.

This Commission will meet on March 10, and I will appreciate it if you will have the statement furnished at your earliest convenience.

Thanking you in advance for your kindness, I beg to remain,

Yours, very truly, JOSEPH FLORY, Secretary.

W.B. STEVENS, Esq., Secretary Exposition Company, Building.

ST. LOUIS, U.S.A., February 19, 1903.

DEAR SIR: The information asked for in your letter of the 5th instant, namely, "A statement showing contract obligations for the several buildings, names of contractors, dates fixed for payment, amount heretofore paid, and dates for final completion of each structure," is being prepared and will be forwarded to you.

Respectfully, W.B. STEVENS, Secretary.

Mr. JOSEPH FLORY, Secretary.

The statements furnished by the Exposition Company following this correspondence did not seem to the Commission to be sufficiently explanatory of the financial condition of the exposition, and with a view of obviating this difficulty, and of insuring better results in the future, the Commission on March 13, 1903, appointed a special auditing committee, consisting of Messrs. Scott, Thurston, and Miller, to audit the books and accounts of the Exposition Company up to April 1, 1903. Mr. Scott, as chairman, was authorized by the following resolution to make the audit:

Copy of Resolution.

Resolved, That the special auditing committee heretofore appointed be, and said committee is hereby, directed to inquire into and report to the Commission at its earliest convenience the true situation concerning the financial condition of the Exposition Company in the matter of cash receipts from different sources, including receipts for admissions and concessions and other sources; also all disbursements of any nature made by the Exposition Company. They will also examine all advertisements for bids; also all competitive bids submitted by contractors under each advertisement, and compare the accepted bids with the rejected bids, and determine if the accepted bids are reasonable in comparison with the material and service rendered. They will also prepare a comparative statement showing all bids submitted, and a copy of all contracts as finally awarded.

It is the wish of the Commission that you, as chairman of the special auditing committee, proceed with as much expedition as possible to make the examination and secure the information as set forth in above resolution.

Owing to the magnitude of the work of auditing the books of such an immense enterprise, Mr. Scott engaged the services of Jones, Caesar & Co., expert accountants, of St. Louis, to make the investigation under supervision of the committee.

On June 23, 1903, the special auditing committee made a report to the Commission, and at various times thereafter submitted other reports of the financial standing of the Exposition Company, based upon the findings of the above-named firm of expert accountants, all of which are in the files of the Commission.

The last report of the expert accountants employed by the Commission, containing a statement of receipts and disbursements of the Exposition Company from date of its incorporation to date of April 30, 1905, together with a condensed statement compiled by said expert accountants, showing their estimate of the financial result of the exposition, which they state has been prepared from the accounts of the company to May 3, 1905, and from an estimate of future receipts and expenditures, furnished by the president of the Exposition Company, is herewith submitted as a part of this report as "Appendix No. 1."

The Commission was compelled from time to time to call the attention of the Exposition Company to the apparently excessive number of free admissions in comparison with the total attendance at the exposition.

On May 10, 1904, the Commission wrote to the Exposition Company, pointing out that for the first seven days of the exposition, with the exception of the opening day, the number of free admissions compared with paid admissions was in the ratio of 7 to 6. On several subsequent occasions the Commission insisted that prompt action should be taken to check the indiscriminate use of passes.

On May 24, 1904, the Commission adopted the following resolution:

Resolved, That Mr. Thurston, as a member of the judiciary committee present, call upon Judge Ferris, general counsel for the Exposition Company, and indicate to him the condition of correspondence with reference to free admissions to the fair grounds, and to suggest to him that in the absence of any disposition on the part of the Exposition Company to take notice of the protests of the Commission, he has been authorized to prepare the case for submission to the Attorney-General of the United States, with request that action be taken in the courts to prevent further violation of the law and rules as agreed upon by the joint action of the company and the Commission.

On the same day Mr. Thurston, in a conference with Judge Ferris, general counsel of the Exposition Company, brought the said action of the Commission to his attention and insisted that the Exposition Company should at once take immediate steps to put an end to the excessive and improper issuance of free passes. Mr. Thurston was assured by Judge Ferris that he would immediately consult with the exposition officials and endeavor to secure such action on their part as would meet the views and wishes of the Commission.

As there was no apparent cessation in the distribution of passes, the president of the Commission, on May 31, addressed the following communication to the president of the Exposition Company:

MAY 31, 1904.

SIR: Under date of May 26 Secretary Stevens transmitted to the National Commission what he denominated "The rules and regulations governing and restricting the issuance and use of passes," as adopted by the company and now in operation. This communication, with the rules referred to attached, was obviously intended as an answer to the communication of the Commission to the company on that subject under dates of May 10 and May 19.

I am directed by the Commission to call your attention to the following sentence contained in my letter of 19th, above referred to, to wit:

"Persons not entitled to admission to the grounds under article 5 of the rules and regulations can only be legally and properly admitted by the Exposition Company with the approval of the National Commission."

With that proposition the answer of the executive committee of your company takes issue by submitting what you evidently deemed a sufficient answer through rules and regulations adopted by the company and now in operation, without the approval of the Commission.

The Commission understands that the following issues arise from this letter and the correspondence to which it refers, to wit:

First. That the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company asserts and is exercising the asserted right to formulate and put into operation rules and regulations governing and restricting the issuance and use of free passes to the exposition grounds, without submitting such rules and regulations to the Commission and obtaining its approval thereof.

Second. That the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company asserts and is acting upon the assertion of its alleged right, through its officers and agents, to issue free passes to the exposition grounds without the concurrence or approval of the National Commission, expressed through general rules or regulations or otherwise.

In reply to these asserted rights, and the exercise thereof by the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Commission denies the right of the company to promulgate and put into operation rules and regulations governing and prescribing the issuance and use of free passes to the exposition grounds without submitting such rules and regulations to the Commission, and without obtaining its approval thereof, and denies the right of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company to issue free passes to the exposition grounds without the concurrence or approval of the National Commission, expressed through general rules and regulations, or otherwise.

Upon the two issues here presented the Commission invokes the judgment of the board of arbitration, provided for in section 4 of the act of Congress, entitled:

"An act to provide for celebrating the one hundredth anniversary of the purchase of the Louisiana territory by the United States by holding an international exhibition of arts, industries, manufactures, and the products of the soil, mine, forest, and sea, in the city of St. Louis, in the State of Missouri, approved March 3, 1901."

For convenience a copy of the correspondence referred to is hereunto attached.

Hon. John M. Allen and Hon. John M. Thurston, the members of the Commission appointed to act for this body on the board of arbitration, will hold themselves in readiness to meet the members of that board appointed by the company at their pleasure.

Yours, very respectfully,
THOS. H. CARTER.

Hon. D.R. FRANCIS,
President Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company.

On June 14 the Exposition Company submitted certain rules and regulations governing the issuance of passes. The Commission gave due consideration to the proposed rules, and on June 25 returned them to the Exposition Company with certain modifications, which the executive committee of the Exposition Company refused to adopt. Whereupon, on July 7, the Commission, by resolution, demanded immediate arbitration on the matter and protested against the issuance of free admissions pending a decision by the board of arbitration.

Mr. Joseph Flory, secretary of the Commission since its organization,
resigned from that office on July 1, 1904. Mr. Lawrence H. Grahame, of
New York, assistant secretary, was elected as secretary to succeed Mr.
Flory.

On July 13, 1904, the board of arbitration of the Commission and the Exposition Company finally met, and the question of free passes was discussed. Another meeting of the arbitrators was held on July 18, and rules and regulations governing the use of passes were drafted.

These rules were subsequently adopted by the company and approved by the
Commission on July 20, 1904. The rules read as, follows:

Resolved, That the rules and regulations governing free admission to the exposition grounds, prepared by the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, governing the corporation are fixed and established by said company to read as follows:

The official badges of the officers and directors of the company, directors of divisions, and chiefs of departments of the exposition, duly approved by the board of directors of the company; the official badges of the officers and members of the National Commission, duly approved by said Commission; and the official badge of the board of lady managers, duly approved by said board, shall entitle the officers and members wearing the same to free admission to the exposition grounds.

Card passes for the entire period of the exposition will be issued to the following officials and their wives, to wit:

The President of the United States.

The Vice-President of the United States.

Members of the Cabinet.

Judges of the Supreme Court of the United States.

The Secretary to the President of the United States.

Members and officers of the National Commission.

The directors and officers of the Exposition Company.

The mayor of the city of St. Louis.

Card passes for the entire period of the exposition will be
issued to the following persons, to wit:

Members of both Houses of Congress, and the chief officers
thereof.

The Diplomatic Corps.

The diplomatic representatives of the United States abroad.

The governors of States, Territories, Districts, and dependencies of the United States, and the Commissioners of the District of Columbia.

Commissioners of foreign countries accredited to the exposition.

Commissioners of States, Territories, Districts, and
dependencies of the United States accredited to the exposition.

Directors of divisions and chiefs of the departments and bureaus
of the exposition.

The widows of deceased directors of the Exposition Company.

The members of the board of lady managers.

Members of the United States Government board.

The commander of the Jefferson Guards and his official aides.

The members and chief officers of the municipal assembly of the
city of St. Louis.

The heads of departments of the municipal government of the city
of St. Louis.

The chief of police and the chief of the detective force of St.
Louis.

Limited admission passes will be granted, under such rules and regulations as the Exposition Company may prescribe, to the following classes of persons whose duties require their presence upon the exposition grounds, to wit:

The judges and jurors of awards.

Employees of the Exposition Company.

Employees of the National Commission.

Employees of the board of lady managers.

Officers and employees of the United States actually in charge of or connected with the Government exhibits, or otherwise officially engaged within the exposition grounds.

Agents and employees of foreign governments actually in charge of or connected with their exhibits or buildings.

Duly accredited press representatives.

Private exhibitors and their employees.

Concessionaires and their employees.

The term "employee" as herein used shall be construed as meaning only such persons as are actually and necessarily employed within the exposition grounds, and when in any case such employment ceases the pass shall be taken up and canceled.

A vehicle may be admitted to the grounds upon payment of 50 cents, but the driver and occupants thereof shall be subject to the general rules governing admissions.

Provided, That all official vehicles and the vehicles of officers and directors of the Exposition Company, of officers and members of the National Commission, and the members of the board of lady managers shall, with the driver thereof, be admitted free upon presentation of official permit.

Any person entering the grounds upon a badge or card pass shall be required to deposit with the gate keeper a personal card with pass number thereon.

In exceptional cases the president of the Exposition Company may issue passes to persons not included in the foregoing classification, when such action is deemed for the best interest of the exposition.

Passes will not be replaced during the period for which same may have been issued. When a pass is lost, prompt notice should be given to the department of admissions in order that notice of same may be posted and the pass taken up if presented.

When an employee is discharged or resigns, a pass will not be issued to his successor until the original pass is returned to the department of admissions.

The Louisiana Purchase Exposition reserves the right to call in and revoke or cancel any pass at any time.

Passes are void and will be forfeited if showing any evidence of alteration or erasure. All passes are nontransferable, and will be forfeited if presented by any other than person named thereon.

Any person holding a pass may be required to prove his identity
by signature or otherwise.

All passes will be issued subject to the conditions printed
thereon.

All passes issued in conflict with the foregoing rules and
regulations shall be recalled and canceled.

The Exposition Company shall furnish the National Commission a complete list of all card passes and a statement of all other passes issued prior to July 1, classified as to departments, divisions, and bureaus, as accurately as may be done from the books of the company, and hereafter the company shall keep an accurate record by departments, divisions, and bureaus, showing all passes issued by each under the foregoing rules, and shall furnish a copy of such record to the National Commission with each monthly financial statement, and such statement shall contain a list of all card passes issued during the month to which the financial report refers.

Prior to the approval of the rules and regulations governing free admissions to the exposition grounds, the president of the Exposition Company exercised a free hand in the distribution of passes.

On April 30, and during the month of May, 1904, of the 1,841,275 total admissions only 667,772 were paid admissions, thus making the free admissions substantially two-thirds of the total.

In June, 1904, the total admissions were 2,448,519, and of this number 1,382,865 were paid.

In July an improvement occurred. Of the 2,498,265 admissions during that month, 1,514,743 were paid. Thenceforward less than one-half of the total admissions were free. But notwithstanding the effort to check this abuse it was indulged to such an extent that the final totals make a remarkable showing, as follows:

Total admissions during the entire period
of the exposition ………………….. 20,066,537
Total paid admissions during the entire
period of the exposition ……………. 12,804,616

The total attendance and the paid admissions at the exposition do not compare favorably with those of the Columbian Exposition of 1893. The Columbian Exposition was conducted during a period of great financial depression, while the St. Louis Exposition was held during a period of remarkable prosperity. The Government aid extended to the latter was far greater in every respect than was given the former.

The method of advertising the exposition adopted by the company was a subject of constant and almost universal criticism, and complaints were made to the Commission and in the public press that exploitation of the fair was inadequate. On every possible occasion members of the Commission personally brought the matter to the attention of the exposition officials and suggested that steps be taken to give the enterprise wider publicity.

The Commission received communications and personal visits almost daily from persons interested in the success of the exposition, urging that some official action be taken to improve the existing advertising arrangements. So insistent became the demand for greater publicity that the president of the Commission addressed the following letter to the Exposition Company, suggesting the importance of properly advertising the exposition throughout the country.

JULY 20, 1904.

DEAR SIR: By direction of the National Commission, I respectfully call your attention to the apparent need for an extension and enlargement of the publicity feature of the exposition.

The zeal and efficiency of the press of the city of St. Louis has demonstrated what may be done in the creation of active interest by enlightened exploitation through the public press. Within the range of the general circulation of the papers published in this city all features of the fair have been made known; but, unhappily, the journals of this city, like those of all other cities, enjoy general circulation only in a limited area. Beyond the line of the special influence of the local press the extensive proportions and interesting details of the fair do not appear to the Commission to have been made known to the general public, to the extent or in the manner calculated to inspire the interest and secure the attendance warranted by the extraordinary merits of the great educational force here installed. In the opinion of the Commission this delinquency does not arise from any lack of devotion to the public welfare by the press of the country at large.

The munificent recognition of the fair by the General Government attracted national attention. The invitation extended by the President of the United States, under authority of law, to the nations of the earth to participate in the exposition, supplemented by the cordial cooperation of our diplomatic and consular representatives abroad, secured the most extensive foreign participation ever accorded to any like undertaking. Moved thereto by the example of the National Government, the States, Territories, and dependencies of the United States joined in the exposition with unparalleled generosity and enthusiasm. The groups of palatial buildings erected by the foreign governments and by the States and minor subdivisions of our country, together with the exhibits installed in the exhibition palaces provided by the company, bear the amplest testimony of their earnest desire to make the exposition a pronounced success. The splendid exhibit installed here by the government of the Philippine Islands rises to the proportions of an exposition on its own account.

The buildings are completed, the exhibits are installed, and the exposition has been in progress for substantially three-sevenths of its allotted period. The faith of the management in the merits of the exposition has been justified by the approving judgment of all who have entered the gates; but the daily attendance has been far short of what it should be from any point of view.

Unhappily, the magnificent proportions and the numberless attractions of the exposition do not seem to be fully understood by the masses of the people throughout the United States, whence attendance must be chiefly expected. The results obtained from the territory commanded by the press of St. Louis warrants the belief that the unsatisfactory conditions prevailing would be overcome if the country at large could be adequately advised of what is to be seen, learned, and enjoyed within these grounds.

All the National, State, Territorial, and District governments participating in the exposition are quite as much interested as the company in the diffusion of knowledge concerning the merits of the exposition and securing the attendance of the largest number of people who may find it possible to enjoy the benefits and the pleasure of a visit to the grounds. It appears to the Commission that the company may well call to its aid the forces referred to. The details through which publicity may be widely extended might wisely be made the result of a conference by a committee made up of persons appointed by the Exposition Company, the National Commission, and the representatives of Governments, States, Territories, and Districts having duly accredited commissioners appointed to represent them. It is probable that such a conference would find the representatives of each Government, State, and District anxious to cooperate by furnishing detailed information along well-considered lines concerning the participation of each in the fair. For example, the people of New York will be interested in a well-prepared description of the exhibits of that State, whereas the same subject-matter would not be of like interest to the people of California; but, on the contrary, the people of California would be interested in a graphic description of California exhibits.

The newspapers of the respective States will, without doubt, cheerfully give space to descriptive matter directly relating to the exhibits and achievements of their readers.

One instance has been called to the attention of the Commission where the names of visitors to the fair, registered at a State building, are being forwarded to the leading daily papers of the State, and published as a matter of news in their columns. The papers in question not only publish the list of arrivals at the exposition, but have called for any other matter of interest occurring here relating to the people or affairs of the State. This method of publicity pursued by the commissioners of one State might, as the result of conference, become generally adopted. The Exposition Company could well afford to aid and assist in the preparation of descriptive articles, accompanied by plate matter, relating to different localities, because it is evident that the creation of interest in any locality will contribute to the general purpose. But it is not the intention to here attempt to detail the many ways of securing merited publicity which would undoubtedly evolve from a general conference by representatives of all the interested forces.

The commissioners representing the various States and governments are persons of wide experience and broad intelligence; and they are all, in their respective spheres, undoubtedly as anxious to contribute to the success of the exposition as the directors and officers of the Exposition Company are known to be.

It is far from the intention of the Commission to interfere with the operation of any of your own matured plans; but it is respectfully submitted that the failure of expected and necessary attendance at the exposition is a matter of such supreme importance as to warrant the employment of every available force connected with this enterprise in the work of calling public attention to the exposition through the press of the whole country, and such other agencies as may be suggested and adopted.

Very respectfully,

Thos. H. CARTER,
President.

Hon. D.R. FRANCIS,
President Exposition Company, Building.

The exposition management did not elect to avail itself of the cooperation of the National Commission in the matter of exploitation, but very shortly after the foregoing letter was delivered the advertising department became more active by advertising in the newspapers and by the use of billboards in St. Louis and the adjacent territory.

The National Bill Posters' Association, which met in St. Louis about this time, observing the inadequacy of the provision made for advertising, volunteered to cooperate with the Exposition Company by posting bills on their boards free of charge throughout an extensive area.

A cursory examination of reports of the daily attendance will show a very perceptible increase of receipts at the gates in consequence of the effort made about this time to call the attractions of the exposition to the attention of the people. Unhappily the exploitation work thus commenced was practically one year behind time. Undoubtedly the paid attendance at the exposition could have been very largely increased by an efficient system of exploitation initiated one year before the gates were opened and vigorously prosecuted until the close of the exposition.

In order to increase the attendance at the exposition, as well as to increase the revenues of the Exposition Company at certain periods, the National Commission at different times cheerfully approved the modifications of the rules proposed by the Exposition Company authorizing the sale of season tickets, also of special tickets for limited periods, at reduced rates. Such modifications proposed by the Exposition Company were in all instances, except one, approved by the National Commission substantially as proposed; but in one instance the Commission was impelled from a sense of its duty to the Government to decline to approve a rule proposed by the company providing for the sale of special coupon tickets good for 50 admissions to stockholders of the company only.

It is proper to say that prior to the submission to the Commission of the proposed rule, or modification of the rules, announcement had been made in the newspapers of St. Louis that such tickets would be sold by the company, and, in fact, the sale of the proposed tickets had already begun.

The following letter contains the proposal of the company to authorize the sale of such special tickets to stockholders only:

MAY 18, 1904.

DEAR SIR: I am directed by the executive committee of the
Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company to inform the National
Commission that the committee has approved the following
resolution:

Resolved, That a ticket, photographic, nontransferable, having 50 coupons good for admission at any time during the World's Fair shall be sold to stockholders at the rate of $12.50; this privilege to continue to and including June 15, to be open to all who shall be stockholders up to and including that day.

I am directed by the executive committee to ask favorable action upon the resolution by the National Commission.

Respectfully,

WALTER B. STEVENS,
Secretary.

Mr. JOSEPH FLORY,
Secretary National Commission.

It was the opinion of the National Commission that the sale of the proposed tickets to stockholders alone at the reduced price proposed was in the nature of a dividend or pecuniary benefit in which the United States Government could not participate, and therefore contrary to law; and in view of the fact that the people of the United States had contributed through the Government appropriation for the exposition an amount of money equal to that which had been furnished by the stockholders of the company it seemed to the Commission that no special privilege respecting the purchase of tickets should be given such stockholders that was not given equally to all citizens of the United States.

This view was especially enforced by the consideration that stockholders of the company had subscribed for such stock in the belief that the citizens of the city of St. Louis would reap large local benefits from the holding of the fair in that city, while it was obvious that the other citizens of the United States could not in any degree participate in such benefits.

The Commission, believing that the sale of special coupon tickets at that time would increase the revenues of the company at a time when such increase seemed to be especially desirable, submitted to the company a modification of the proposed rule, as set forth in the following letter:

MAY 19, 1904.

DEAR SIR: I am directed by the National Commission to inform you that they have had under consideration the resolution contained in your esteemed favor of 18th instant, reading as follows:

"Resolved, That a ticket, photographic, nontransferable, having 50 coupons, good for admission at any time during the World's Fair, shall be sold to stockholders at the rate of $12.50; this privilege to continue to and including June 15, and to be open to all who shall be stockholders up to and including that day."

The Commission respectfully declines to approve the resolution as presented, but, being in hearty accord with the laudable purpose of the company to offer inducements tending to insure an extensive sale of admission tickets before the 15th of June, approves that feature of the resolution by modifying the same so as to read as follows:

"There shall be sold to the public up to and including June 15 at $12.50 a photographic, nontransferable ticket with 50 coupons thereunto attached, each good for one admission to the fair at any time prior to August 31."

In the judgment of the Commission the use of the tickets proposed should be restricted by a time limit, inasmuch as a failure to provide such a restriction would be equivalent to a reduction of admissions to 25 cents each. Moreover, limiting the time for use of the tickets, as proposed, would tend to stimulate attendance at the fair during the summer months.

The Commission is not insensible to the natural desire of the Exposition Company to give some privilege to the stockholders who subscribed to the capital stock of the corporation, but, while appreciating the generous motive of the executive committee, the Commission feels constrained to withhold its approval for the reason that approval thereof would, in the judgment of the Commission, violate the letter and spirit of section 20 of the act of Congress approved March 3, 1901, which, in so far as applicable, reads as follows:

"That there shall be repaid into the Treasury of the United
States the same proportionate amount of the aid given by the
United States as shall be repaid to either the Louisiana
Purchase Exposition Company or the city of St. Louis."

The proposal to give to stockholders of the Exposition Company tickets of admission good until December 1 at half price confers upon the stock a special privilege not contemplated by the act of Congress, and is apparently in the nature of a dividend or pecuniary benefit in which the United States can not participate.

I am also directed by the Commission to say that if, in the opinion of the company, the best interests of the fair would be advanced by making the proposed tickets good for the entire time of the fair the Commission would view such action with favor, providing the price of the ticket should be fixed at $15.

Yours, very respectfully, JOSEPH FLORY, Secretary.

Mr. WALTER B. STEVENS, Secretary Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, Building.

On May 23, 1904, a conference was held between the National Commission and a committee on conference appointed by the Exposition Company. At such conference the National Commission insisted that the proposed special coupon tickets be sold to the public, while the conferees on the part of the company urged the acceptance of the original rule proposed by said company, limiting the sale of stockholders only. Finally, upon the proposal of the conferees of the company, and in order to reach an agreement, the National Commission assented to a rule whereby the company should be authorized to sell such tickets to its stockholders, also to any person presenting an order from the National Commission therefor, as is set forth in the following copy of the conference agreement:

At a conference between the officers and members of the executive committee of the Exposition Company and members of the National Commission, held at the office of President Francis on Monday, May 23, it was agreed, after a full and free conference, that the disagreement existing between the Exposition Company and the Commission with reference to the sale of 50-coupon, photographic, nontransferable tickets to stockholders of the Exposition Company, at $12.50 each, on or before June 15, such tickets to be good during the period of the fair, was settled by the adoption of the following addition to article 5, to wit:

"That any stockholder of the Exposition Company, or any person presenting an order from the National Commission to the treasurer of the company, may, at any time prior to June 15, purchase for $12.50 one photographic nontransferable ticket with 50 coupons attached, each coupon good for one admission to the fair at any time on or before December 1, 1904."

To which addition to the aforesaid article 5 full assent was
given by the company and the Commission.

D.R. FRANCIS, President,
W.H. THOMPSON, Treasurer,
FESTUS J. WADE,
Chairman Ways and Means Committee,
Committee Representing Louisiana Purchase Exposition Co.

Thos. H. CARTER,
JOHN M. THURSTON,
GEO. W. MCBRIDE,
PHILIP D. SCOTT,
JOHN F. MILLER,
FREDERICK A. BETTS,
For the National Commission Louisiana Purchase Exposition.

The Commission, desiring that the public should have the amplest opportunity to participate in the purchase of these special tickets at reduced rates, and in order that the knowledge of such privilege should have the widest publicity, addressed and sent to the Associated Press the following notice:

To the Associated Press:

Some days ago the Exposition Company proposed to issue a nontransferable photographic coupon ticket good for 50 admissions for the sum of $12.50, that amount being half rate. This proposal was disapproved by the National Commission, because deemed in the nature of a dividend on the stock. The Commission insisted that if the price of tickets was reduced in the manner proposed, they should be presented to the public for sale without preference as to purchasers. As the result of a conference it was agreed that the Exposition Company might sell to its stockholders nontransferable tickets at the rate of $12.50 each for 50 admissions, and that at the same time any person not a stockholder presenting an order from the National Commission to the treasurer of the company would be entitled to the same privilege. The Commission desires to announce that any person not a stockholder of the Exposition Company may, upon application to the Commission, procure an order on the treasurer of the Exposition Company for the delivery of one of the tickets referred to upon the payment of $12.50. The privilege of purchase can not be exercised after June 15. Applications for orders may be made in person or by letter addressed to the National Commission, Administration Building, St. Louis. Payment for tickets to be made to William H. Thompson, treasurer, Laclede Building, St. Louis.

JOSEPH FLORY, Secretary.

The sale of these tickets was larger than had been expected either by the company or the Commission, and that it was satisfactory to the company was indicated by its proposal, under date of June 7, 1904, to extend the sale of such tickets from June 15 to and including July 1, the price being increased to $15. This proposal was promptly approved by the National Commission, and the sale resulted in materially increasing the revenues of the Exposition Company.

JURORS AND AWARDS.

It will be perceived that rules and regulations governing the appointment of jurors and the awarding of premiums were presented by the company and adopted by the company and adopted by the Commission on May 2, 1903. These rules required that the nominations of all proposed jurors be submitted to the Commission on or before August 1, 1904.

Believing that the approval of the jurors by the Commission should not be merely perfunctory, but that the nominations should be scrutinized with care before approval, the Commission, on the 18th day of May, 1904, addressed the Exposition Company the following self-explanatory communication:

ST. LOUIS, May 19, 1904.

Hon. D.R. FRANCIS, President Exposition Company.

MY DEAR SIR: Inasmuch as objections may be urged to the appointment of certain persons upon juries of awards, it is the intention of the National Commission to give public notice, allowing reasonable time for the filing of any objections that may be offered to the appointment of any individual on the jury. As this proceeding will necessarily consume time, it is desirable that the names of persons proposed for the respective juries be transmitted to the Commission from time to time as the respective groups are completed by the company. It is believed that final action can be reached in a more orderly and satisfactory manner by taking up the names proposed for each jury separately rather than to have the entire membership of all the juries submitted for consideration simultaneously.

Yours, very respectfully,
THOS. H. CARTER, President.

A communication on the same subject was addressed to the president of the Exposition Company on May 23, as follows:

MAY 23, 1904.

DEAR SIR: By direction of the Commission, I have the honor to call your attention to section 6 of the act of Congress making an appropriation for the exposition, and for other purposes, approved March 3, 1901, which provides that the appointment of all judges and examiners for the exposition shall be made by the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, subject to the approval of the Commission created by section 2 of the act.

Some days ago a gentleman reported to the Commission that certain jurors had been appointed and were actually discharging their duties as judges and examiners. This rumor seemed to the Commission utterly incredible, but this morning the director of exhibits confirmed the rumor informally by admitting that certain jurors had been at work for a considerable length of time in certain departments of the exposition.

The Commission does not desire to assume a position at all hypercritical, but I am directed to say that an utter disregard of provisions of the law can not be countenanced.

To the end that no question may arise concerning the legality or regularity of the action of any jury or board of examiners, I have the honor to request, in behalf of the Commission, that the names of jurors be forwarded to the Commission for consideration before there is any pretense to giving them authority to act.

Inasmuch as an infraction of the law has heretofore occurred according to the director of exhibits, I can but request that the names of the jurors who have heretofore been commissioned to act be forwarded for consideration without delay. We are not unmindful that free and full consideration of the names of persons thus empowered to act without full authority will be somewhat embarrassing in view of their having been employed for a considerable length of time before the Commission will have been advised of their designation by the company.

Yours, very respectfully,

Thos. H. CARTER,
President.

Hon. D.R. FRANCIS,
President Exposition Company, Building.

As indicated by correspondence hereinafter set forth, the company did not present the names of jurors to the Commission on or before August 1, and indeed did not advise the Commission of the names of many of the jurors until long after the time had elapsed for the performance of their duties.

After the group juries had performed their duties certain persons, feeling aggrieved by the awards made, undertook to appeal to the Commission for redress. The Commission disclaimed jurisdiction to consider the matter until the awards were submitted to it for approval. Upon inquiry growing out of these attempted appeals, it was ascertained by the Commission that the Exposition Company questioned the right of the Commission to inquire into or in any manner to pass upon the justice or regularity of any award made. The company having submitted certain proposed amendments to the rules and regulations, the Commission undertook by further amendments to settle the question as to the right of the company to refuse to submit awards made to the Commission for its approval, as required by law. The right of the Commission to even inquire into charges of fraud, bribery, or corruption in connection with awards the company steadily denied and never conceded.

In the records of the Commission filed with this report will be found charges under oath against a division chief, alleging that he was a party to negotiations for a bribe of $2,000 to be paid on the awarding of the grand prize to a certain manufactured article, and that when the matter was brought to his attention his only explanation was that he had declined to be the stakeholder or custodian of the money because of possible criticism in case the transaction should become public. This individual was a member of the group jury, a member of the department jury of his department, and a member of the superior jury.

The Commission felt that investigation of such serious charges was absolutely necessary to guarantee the integrity of the awards.

On October 18, 1904, Commissioner Allen, as acting president of the
Commission, set forth the existing status of the case in a letter to
Hon. D.R. Francis, president of the Exposition Company, reading as
follows:

OCTOBER 18, 1904.

SIR: On October 11 the National Commission sent to the local company a communication suggesting certain amendments to an amendment to the rules and regulations governing the system of awards sent us by the Exposition Company. To date we have not received reply to the communication referred to, nor have we heard from your company, excepting a visit from Judge Wilbur F. Boyle, a member of your executive committee, who called on the Commission on Friday, October 14, in relation to this matter.

The amendments suggested by this Commission were to carry into effect the law as we understand it, and what we have been assured was so understood by your company, to wit: That the awards, before becoming final, should be approved by the National Commission. We infer from what was said by you to Mr. Scott, a member of this Commission, and what was said by Judge Boyle to the Commission, that the position of your company is that the approval of the National Commission only refers to the system of making the awards, and not to the awards of the juries. While we do not agree to this contention, we desire to call your attention to what we consider a number of violations of the rules and regulations governing the system of awards, as agreed upon by the local company and the National Commission. In the first place, in paragraph 3 of the special rules and regulations providing for the appointment of jurors and governing the system of making awards, it is set forth "that the nominations for group jurors shall be made not later than August 1, 1904, except that nominations made to fill vacancies may be made at any subsequent time." It is also provided "that nominations of group jurors and alternates, when approved by the president of the Exposition Company, shall be transmitted to the National Commission for the approval of that body." "These nominations, having been considered and confirmed by the authority provided by section 6 of the act of Congress, relating to the approval of the awarding of premiums, the appointment to the international jury shall be made in accordance with section 6 of article 22 of the official rules and regulations of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company."

You will remember that the nominations of group jurors were not made until long after the time specified in the rules and regulations, which left but a brief time to notify the jurors and allow them time to get here to begin the performance of their duties by the 1st of September.

You will doubtless remember that the writer, Mr. Allen, had an interview with you and Mr. Skiff, in which he protested on behalf of the National Commission that no time was given the Commission to investigate the character of qualifications of the jurors thus nominated, and that it was placing in the hands of the chiefs of the different departments the power to fix up juries and make the awards conform to their own wishes, if they desired to do so.

You will also doubtless remember that Mr. Skiff, in your presence, said to Mr. Allen, as he has said to the Commission frequently before and as he assured us he had said to hundreds of exhibitors, that after the action of the group juries these awards would have to pass the department juries, then the superior jury, then the local company, and finally be approved by the National Commission, and that if anything wrong was done by the group juries thus selected ample opportunity would be had to right such wrong. Acting on this assurance the National Commission went ahead and approved such jurors as were sent them for their approval.

Paragraph 4 of said rules and regulations provides that each group jury shall choose its own officers, consisting of a chairman, vice-chairman, and secretary. It came to the knowledge of the Commission that when the group juries were being organized this rule was being violated, and in most, if not all instances, the officers of the group juries were being selected by the chiefs of the departments. We went to see the secretary of the exhibit department, who had charge of the matter of juries in that department, and informed him of this violation of the rules. We were informed by him that he did not know the chiefs had gone to the extent of informing the juries who their officers should be, but that they had been instructed to make suggestions that they might keep the chairmanship of the juries in the hands of the Americans.

We find that a large number of group jurors have been appointed, have participated in making awards, have been paid off, and have gone home without their names ever having been submitted to the National Commission for approval.

We are informed that the course adopted by the chiefs in the organization of the group juries was pursued when it came to the organization of the department juries, and in this way the chiefs, in violation of the rules, have selected the main body of the superior jury. We were also informed that the department juries were instructed to pass the matters that we think would properly belong to that body up to the superior jury; consequently the principal duty performed by the department jury was to enable the chiefs to select two members for the superior jury. We have been informed that the chiefs in some departments have taken it upon themselves to forbid the jurors from considering certain matters that were proper subjects for their consideration.

In paragraph 15 of said rules and regulations it is provided that if for any reason an award is not satisfactory to an exhibitor he may file notice to that effect with the president of the superior jury within three days after the official notification of the award; this notice shall be followed within seven days by a written statement setting forth at length his views as to wherein the award is unjust. We see now that the superior jury has been disbanded within three or four days after most of the exhibitors received their official notification, thus cutting off the opportunity of exhibitors who were dissatisfied with the awards to present their cases as provided for by the rules.

We are also informed that instead of the superior jury hearing any protests or complaints of the awards, these were referred to subboards or subjuries made up in the main of jurors who had been brought up by the chiefs from the various group juries to the superior jury by the methods heretofore described.

We have also been informed by a gentleman who attempted to make a protest and get a hearing before these subcommittees so organized with the superior jury that he was informed he could only make his complaint to the chief of the department from which the exhibit referred to came, and when one chief was approached he said he would not permit the matter complained of to be investigated by the superior jury. He then appealed to the full superior jury to hear him, and he was informed that they had agreed that no one should be heard. So that it occurs to us that the thing we sought to warn you against has been practically accomplished, and the assurance given us that the method by which these things might be corrected has been denied, so that if we understand your contention that we were only to approve the system of making awards instead of the awards we claim the system that we approved has been violated from start to finish.

We also find that some jurors who were appointed and approved for certain departments had been transferred to other groups and departments without the knowledge or approval of the National Commission.

We are not thoroughly familiar with the character of all your chiefs for integrity or impartiality, but from some things that we have heard we are unwilling for some of them to make up a list of awards without the National Commission's performance of the duty that devolves on us by the act of Congress and by section 6 of article 22 of the rules and regulations of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition, adopted in pursuance of an act of Congress of the United States, and we again wish to protest as we have had occasion to do several times before, against the apparent disposition on the part of the local company to ignore the National Commission, and disregard the powers vested in this body by the act of Congress, under which this exposition is held.

We see from the papers that your company, without any reference to the National Commission, is proceeding to publish the list of awards made as heretofore described in this communication. We wish to enter a protest against this being done, and to inform you that under section 4 of the act of Congress a board of arbitration is provided for, "to whom all matters of difference arising between the Commission and said company concerning the administration, management, and general supervision of said exposition, including all matters of difference arising out of the power given by this act to the said company, or to the said National Commission to modify or approve any act of the other of the two bodies, shall be referred for determination," and to notify you that we insist upon such arbitration if your company insists upon its refusal to submit these awards to the National Commission for approval.

The matters to be submitted to said arbitration board are as follows:

First. The right of the National Commission to have submitted for its approval the awards found under the jury system and ready to be promulgated by the superior jury.

Second. If our contention as to our rights in this matter be found by said board of arbitration against us, then as to whether or not the rules and regulations adopted by the local company and the National Commission governing the system of awards have been so complied with as to bind the National Commission to any approval of the system by which the awards have been made.

Third. Whether or not, under the rules and regulations, it is necessary for the president of the National Commission to sign the diplomas or certificate of awards; and if so, can his name be put on such diplomas or certificates without his consent.

We trust any further announcement of the awards of the superior jury may be withheld until this matter shall have been arbitrated.

Respectfully,

THE LOUISIANA PURCHASE EXPOSITION COMMISSION,
JOHN M. ALLEN, Acting President.

Hon. D.R. FRANCIS,
President Exposition Company, Building.

A formal acknowledgment of this letter was received from Secretary Stevens, with the advice that the same had been placed before the executive committee for consideration.

At about this time there appeared in several St. Louis newspapers advertisements of prominent firms of St. Louis, setting forth the alleged fact that they had been awarded grand prizes on their exhibits, and in connection with such advertisements was displayed a cut of an official award ribbon, bearing the facsimile signature of the president, the director of exhibits, the secretary of the Exposition Company, and the chief of the department in which the exhibit was made.

The fact that the awards were being advertised broadcast in this manner before they had been approved by the Commission was called to the attention of President Francis by Mr. Allen, acting president, by a letter under date of November 4, as follows:

NOVEMBER 4, 1904.

SIR: If the inclosed advertisement is published by authority of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, it seems to be directly in conflict with the understanding had with the National Commission that before awards be announced officially they were to be submitted to the National Commission for approval. This advertisement purports to be by authority of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, signed by David R. Francis, president, and F.J.V. Skiff, director of exhibits. No final action on awards by the superior jury have been submitted to the National Commission, but nearly all the exhibitors in the exhibit buildings are advertising what purports to be the official awards.

We most earnestly submit that this action on the part of the exhibitors is in direct conflict with the law and with the agreement had with you by the National Commission, and if it is being done with the approval of your company, we desire again to protest against it. We understood after our demand for arbitration on the construction of the law as to the right of the National Commission to approve or disapprove of awards, that your company agreed to our contention, and that these awards were to be submitted to us before being published. If your understanding does not accord with ours, we again ask for arbitration. If it does accord with ours, we insist that the spirit of this agreement be adhered to.

Very respectfully,

JOHN M. ALLEN, Acting President.

Hon. D.R. FRANCIS, President Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, Administration Building.

The following communication was received from President Francis, in reply to Mr. Allen's letter:

NOVEMBER 4, 1904.

DEAR SIR: I am in receipt of contents of your letter of this date concerning the advertisement of the Brown Shoe Company of their awards. It surprised me as much as it did you. I have instituted inquiries, and as soon as I ascertain by whose authority the announcement was put in the papers, I shall advise you. Of course you know that the exposition authorities had no knowledge of such an advertisement until it was given to the public. These ribbons are sold by a concessionaire, who was instructed weeks ago to sell none of them until the awards are officially announced.

Very truly, yours,

D.R. FRANCIS,
President.

Hon. J.M. ALLEN,
Acting President National Commission, St. Louis, Mo.

Shortly after the receipt of the foregoing letter from President Francis another letter bearing the same matter was delivered to the Commission, as follows:

NOVEMBER 4, 1904.

DEAR SIR: Since writing you a hurried note this morning, I have read your letter more carefully, and desire to state in addition that, referring to that portion of your letter relating to what you term an "agreement" between this company and the National Commission that no award can be made without being approved by the Commission, I beg to say I am not advised of such an agreement or understanding having been made. It was our understanding that, before official notification to exhibitors, a list of the awards made by the superior jury would be furnished by the secretary of said jury to the Commission and also to this company for their information and for the purpose of giving to the Commission and to this company an opportunity to call the attention of the jury (or the committee of five now acting as such) to any errors which the Commission or this company might discover, so that the same might be considered and corrected before giving official notification to the exhibitors. My understanding is that the committee of five are sending these lists as fast as its clerical force can make them out.

Yours, truly,

D.R. FRANCIS,
President.

Hon. JOHN M. ALLEN,
Acting President National Commission.

On November 5, Mr. Allen addressed another communication to President
Francis, as follows:

NOVEMBER 5, 1904.

SIR: The National Commission is in receipt of your two letters of the 4th instant, in reply to one of same date sent to you. The first of the two letters recognizes our contention. Your second letter is one of the most surprising communications we have ever had from the local company. You seem to have mended your hold after your first letter of the 4th instant and for some reason repudiated what Mr. Miller, Mr. Betts, and the writer clearly understood to be an acquiescence in and an agreement to the contentions as to the rights of the National Commission contained in our letter to you of October 18. We inclose herewith a copy of said letter of the 18th instant for the purpose of refreshing your memory without the necessity of looking it up.

You will see that in that letter we defined the contention of the National Commission as to its right to approve or disapprove of the awards of the juries, and it concludes with a demand for arbitration unless this right is conceded by your company.

You will remember that instead of answering this letter you invited Mr. Betts and the writer into your office, where we sent for Mr. Miller, to discuss this question. You should remember that when you broached this subject the writer said to you, "We are not looking for work, nor are we looking for trouble, but we think Congress has imposed this duty of approving and disapproving these awards on us, and we will not shirk it." There was considerable discussion in your office that day, but no intimation from you or anyone else that there was still opposition to our contention. You went on to say that the lists that you were getting out were not official in any sense and would not be until we said so.

You will recall that this interview between us was at your suggestion and intended, we supposed, as an answer to our communication of the 18th of October, in which we had demanded arbitration on this very question. You say in your second letter of the 4th instant that "It was our understanding that before official notification to exhibitors a list of awards of the superior jury would be furnished by the secretary of said jury to the Commission and also to this company for their information and for the purpose of giving the Commission and this company an opportunity to call the attention of the jury, or the committee of five now acting as such, to any errors which the Commission or this company might discover, so that the same might be considered and corrected before giving official notification to the exhibitors." We can not understand where you could have gotten that understanding. I know that there was nothing said about the National Commission having a list submitted to it for any other purpose than the purpose of approval or disapproval. We never asked for a list for information, nor was anything ever said about referring anything back to the committee of five. What was ever said by the members of the National Commission then present to indicate to you that we withdrew or abandoned our demand for arbitration if the right of approval or disapproval was not accorded the National Commission? And if nothing was said by us evidencing such an abandonment of the demand, what answer have you ever made to such a demand? If your conversation with the members of the National Commission in your office that day was not intended to make the impression on them that you assented to sending the awards to the National Commission for approval or disapproval, it was as misleading a conversation as I ever listened to, and both the other gentlemen of the National Commission who were present agree with me in this view.

Right here let me suggest that in the future our written communications be answered in writing. We will then at least have a record in writing.

We reiterate that we are not looking for trouble or work, but as the representatives of the Federal Government we do not propose, if we can prevent it, to acquiesce in having the awards of this exposition promulgated without our approval when we think the law devolves this duty upon us. If your second letter of the 4th instant, in which you state your understanding, is the course your company proposes to take about this matter, we reiterate our demand for arbitration as contained in our letter of October 18. We suppose it will not be contended that we have lost the right of arbitration. We insist that there be no official promulgation of the action of the superior jury until such arbitration shall have been concluded.

Awaiting your early reply,
Very respectfully,

JOHN M. ALLEN,
Acting President.

Hon. D.R. FRANCIS,
President Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company,
Administration Building.

Under date of November 8, President Francis replied to the foregoing letter as follows:

NOVEMBER 8, 1904.

DEAR SIR: Your communication of Saturday, November 5, was not read by me until yesterday, Monday, November 7, and was submitted to the executive committee to-day. I can not say whether the tone and spirit of the letter, or the statement that you misunderstood the position of the Exposition Company, was the more surprising. I desire to state emphatically that at no time have I ever told you or said anything that would justify you in believing that the Exposition Company accepted the contention that the National Commission has the right to approve or disapprove the awards of the superior jury before they are final. It is true I did invite you into my office after the receipt of your letter of October 18, and also true that I stated to you I regretted the view taken by the National Commission of its prerogatives or its duty, but none the less true that I also said that, inasmuch as the rules governing the system of awards had been promulgated and acted upon after approval by the Exhibition Company and the National Commission, that neither the Exposition Company nor the National Commission has the right to review the awards or overturn them. I did state that no official announcement of awards would be made until the Exposition Company and the National Commission should be advised of what they were, to the end that, if there had been any irregularity in the awarding, any errors or omissions, or any fraud, the same might be corrected; but at no time have I ever said anything that would justify you or anyone else in the conclusion that either the Exposition Company or the National Commission had the right to review the action of the superior jury with the power to overturn the awards on the ground that they were not justly made on the merits of the exhibits. It was certainly my understanding when we parted after the conference in my office that the situation was clear to you, and I have a distinct recollection, as does Judge Ferriss, who was present at the conference, that Mr. Betts accepted the situation. You offered no definite objection, but did state in an interrogatory tone that you were not yet ready to relinquish the right of the National Commission to approve the awards. I have had no conversation with you since that date on the subject, but Judge Boyle tells me that in conversation with Mr. Betts on the subject, after the interview in my office, he told Mr. Betts that the superior jury was progressing with its work and had no objection to any member or members of the National Commission being present at its sessions; and further, that as fast as the work progressed the results would be informally communicated to the National Commission, so that if the Commission should find any errors it could call the committee's attention to same, so that corrections could be made before an official announcement of awards. His impression, from the conversation with Mr. Betts, was that this arrangement was entirely satisfactory to the Commission, and would obviate any further controversy as to the right of the Commission to approve or disapprove the awards before they became final.

I therefore not only deny any intention to mislead you or the National Commission concerning the position of the superior jury and the Exposition Company, but state emphatically that I have said nothing that justifies any belief or impression on the part of anyone that either the superior jury or the Exposition Company admitted the contention of the National Commission that it had the right to approve or disapprove awards finally made by the superior jury in pursuance of the rules and regulations adopted by this company and approved by the Commission.

I made two replies to your letter of November 4, and my reason for doing so was explained in the second letter. My first letter was dictated immediately on receipt and on a cursory reading of your communication inclosing the advertisement of an award in the morning papers of November 4, and was hurriedly made through earnest consideration for and extreme courtesy toward the National Commission. It merely advised that I was investigating the advertisement and would report as soon as I could learn upon what authority of the Exposition Company or superior jury, if any, it had been inserted in the daily papers. Upon a rereading of your letter and a reference of same to members of the superior jury, my attention was called to the fact that a failure to reply to that portion of your letter claiming the right of the National Commission to approve or disapprove awards made on their merits might be construed as an acknowledgment of such contention, whereupon I sent to you the second communication. Until the receipt of your letter of the 5th, I was under the impression that the situation as it exists was accepted by the National Commission, as it has been by the Exposition Company.

I note the request in your letter "that in future our (your) written communications be answered in writing," and it will be complied with. Furthermore, if this request is made by authority of the National Commission, as such, I desire that all communications of the National Commission to the Exposition Company shall hereafter be in writing.

As to your request for an arbitration, if you still insist on having it the Exposition Company will interpose no obstacle.

In this connection, I desire to inform you that the diplomas or certificates of award provided for in the rules and regulations are being engraved, and the facsimile signatures of the president, secretary, and director of exhibits of the Exposition Company, and of the president of the National Commission placed thereon. If the National Commission is unwilling to have the name of its president engraved on these diplomas until or unless the awards are approved by the National Commission, the fact should be made known at the earliest possible moment, so that there may be no unnecessary expense incurred.

This letter has been submitted to the executive committee of the
Exposition Company and has been approved by it.

Yours truly

P.R. FRANCIS, President.

Hon. JOHN M. ALLEN, Acting President National Commission, Administration Building.

Informal conferences were held with the exposition officials from time to time, but no agreement was reached, and on November 11 the Commission submitted the following draft of suggestions to the Exposition Company for the finding of the board of arbitration:

First. The awards as made by the superior jury are final and binding upon the Exposition Company and the National Commission, unless the same are impeached for fraud, or unless misconduct amounting to fraud is proven.

Second. The lists of awards as made by the superior jury are to be transmitted to the Exposition Company, and certificates of awards shall be authorized by said company, and thereafter said lists are to be transmitted to the National Commission and certificates of award authorized by said Commission, all without further question or investigation, unless the said awards are impeached for fraud or misconduct, as hereinbefore stated.

Third. No complaint or protest as to any of said awards will be received or considered, either by the Exposition Company or the National Commission, unless the same is made in writing over the signature of some competing exhibitor and substantiated by affidavit or other sworn testimony establishing a prima facie case of such fraud or misconduct in procuring or making of said award.

The arbitration committee of the Exposition Company replied to the foregoing propositions as follows:

NOVEMBER 11, 1904.

DEAR SIR: After consulting Judge Boyle I find that the suggestions you have presented for a finding by the board of arbitration will be acceptable to both of us if the following amendments are made:

First. Change in the first clause, so as to read as follows:

"The awards as made by the superior jury are final and binding upon the Exposition Company and the National Commission, except as to any award or awards which are impeached by said company or Commission for fraudulent conduct on the part of said jury in making the awards."

Second. Omit entirely the third clause.

We are of the opinion that ample provision is made in the rules and regulations for having any fraud or fraudulent conduct on the part of any subordinate jury or juror fully considered and determined by appeal to the superior jury, and that no further precaution or provision is needed unless the conduct of the superior jury is shown to have been fraudulent.

Our purpose in striking out the third clause is that a charge of fraud against the superior jury should be made only when supported with the character and dignity pertaining to the Exposition Company or the National Commission, and that the provision made in the third clause for affidavits is wholly unnecessary because the charge would not be made by either of those bodies except upon such evidence as they would be satisfied warranted making the charge.

Yours, very truly,

CHAS. W. KNAPP,
Member Board of Arbitration.

Hon. JOHN M. THURSTON,
Member Arbitration Board, National Commission.

On November 12, 1904, the Commission addressed the following communication to the President of the Exposition Company, forbidding the use of the signature of the president of the Commission to any certificate of award until the matter at issue was determined.

NOVEMBER 12, 1904.

SIR: Your letter of November 8 received and contents noted. The statements contained therein as to what occurred in your office on the 19th of October in your interview with Mr. Betts, Mr. Miller, and the writer do not accord with the distinct recollection or understanding of any of the three parties mentioned.

I am glad to know that our communications will hereafter be in writing, that these misunderstandings may be avoided. The National Commission is in entire accord with this position, and we will try and observe our part of this understanding.

The informal conferences between the members of the National Commission and representatives of your company seem to have resulted in no definite understanding, and the Commission therefore insists that arbitration be had to determine the true effect and meaning of section 6 of the act of Congress approved March 3, 1901, as affecting the rights and duties of the National Commission to approve or not approve the awards.

In the meantime and until this question is determined the
Commission can not authorize the use of its president's
signature on any certificate of award.

In any arrangement preliminary to the settlement of this controversy the writer will be pleased to confer with your arbitration committee at any time.

Very respectfully,

JOHN M. ALLEN,
Acting President.

Hon. D.R. FRANCIS,
President Exposition Company, Building.

After many futile efforts to reach an agreement as to the subject-matter to be submitted for arbitration, it became obvious to the Commission that it was the intention of the Exposition Company to ignore the right of the Commission to finally consider or approve the awards of the superior jury. Under these circumstances the president of the Commission was directed, on November 22, 1904, by resolution, to forward to the president of the Exposition Company a communication summing up the controversy and stating clearly the stand taken by the Commission.

The communication is as follows:

St. Louis, November 22, 1904.

Sir: To the end that an understanding may be reached as to issues involved in correspondence between your company and the National Commission, extending from the month of May, 1904, almost to the present date, relative to the appointment of jurors and the awarding of premiums, it appears desirable and necessary that the law and the facts be briefly stated and the relative position of your company and the Commission clearly defined.

In so far as applicable to the subjects referred to, section 6 of the act of Congress making an appropriation for the exposition, and for other purposes, approved March 3, 1901, reads as follows:

"That the allotment of space for exhibitors, classification of exhibits, plan and scope of the exposition, the appointment of all judges and examiners for the exposition, and the awarding of premiums, if any, shall all be done and performed by the said Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, subject, however, to the approval of the Commission created by section two of this act."

Under and in conformity with the provisions of law above cited, certain general and special rules and regulations providing for an international jury and governing the system of making awards were submitted by the company and approved by the Commission in the year 1903.

The general rules applicable read as follows:

ARTICLE XXII.

AWARDS.

SECTION 1. The system of awards will be competitive. The merit of exhibits as determined by the jury of awards will be manifested by the issuance of diplomas, which will be divided into four classes—a grand prize, a gold medal, a silver medal, and a bronze medal.

SEC. 2. No exhibit can be excluded from competition for award without the consent of the president of the Exposition Company after a review of the reasons or motives by competent authorities hereafter to be provided.

SEC. 3. In a fixed ratio to the number of exhibits, but reserving to the citizens of the United States approximately 60 per cent of the jury membership, the construction of the international jury will be based upon a predetermined number of judges allotted to each group of the classification and upon the number and importance of the exhibits in such group.

SEC. 4. A chairman of the group jury will be elected by his colleagues in each group, this chairman to become, by right of his position, a member of the department jury, which department jury shall in turn elect its chairman, who shall thereupon become a member of the superior jury.

SEC. 5. Special rules and regulations governing the system of making awards and determining the extent to which foreign countries may have representation on the juries, will be hereafter promulgated.

SEC. 6. Allotment of space for exhibitors, the classification of exhibits, the appointment of all judges and examiners for the exposition, and the awarding of premiums, if any, shall be done and performed by the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, subject, however, to the approval of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Commission.

The special rules provide for the appointment of three graded juries, designated as, first, the general organization of group juries; second, department juries, and, third, the superior jury.

At the conclusion of the recital of the manner of selecting the jurors a paragraph in section 3 of the rules provides that "all the above nominations shall be made not later than August 1, 1904, except that nominations made to fill vacancies may be made at any subsequent time."

In conclusion, the section last referred to reads as follows:

"The nominations of group jurors and alternates, when approved by the president of the exposition, shall be transmitted to the president of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Commission for approval of that body.

"These nominations having been considered and confirmed by the authorities as provided by section 6 of the act of Congress relating to the approval of the awarding of premiums, the appointment of the international jury shall be made in accordance with section 6 of Article XXII of the official rules and regulations of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company."

Section 6 of the aforesaid special rules provides that—

"The work of the group juries shall begin September 1, 1904, and shall be completed not later than twenty days thereafter."

Section 15 of the special rules and regulations provides that—

"The superior jury shall determine finally and fully the awards to be made to exhibitors and collaborators in all cases that are formally presented for its consideration."

Section 16 of the special rules and regulations provides that—

"The work of the superior jury shall be completed on October 15, 1904, and, as soon as practicable thereafter, formal public announcement of the awards shall be made. A final complete list of awards shall be published by the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, in accordance with the provisions of section 6 of the act of Congress, and section 6, Article XXII, of the rules and regulations."

Sec. 27 of the special rules and regulations provides that—

"The diplomas or certificates of award for exhibitors shall be signed by the president of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, the president of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Commission, the secretary of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, the director of exhibits, and the chief of the department to which the exhibit pertains."

The foregoing rules clearly required the submission of the names of all proposed jurors to the Commission for its approval or disapproval prior to August 1, 1904, except as to nominations to fill vacancies.

Realizing the necessity for the exercise of great care on the part of the Commission in the discharge of its duties in the premises, and the necessity for ample time for investigation as to the fitness of persons and their willingness to serve as jurors of awards, the Commission addressed you a letter under date of May 18, 1904, reading as follows:

"SIR: Inasmuch as objections may be urged to the appointment of certain persons upon juries of awards, it is the intention of the National Commission to give public notice, allowing reasonable time for the filing of any objections that may be offered to the appointment of any individual on a jury. As this proceeding will necessarily consume time, it is desirable that the names of persons proposed for the respective juries be transmitted to the Commission from time to time, as the respective groups are completed by the company. It is believed that final action can be reached in a more orderly and satisfactory manner by taking up the names proposed for each jury separately rather than to have the entire membership of all the juries submitted for consideration simultaneously.

Yours, very respectfully,

THOS. H. CARTER, President."

Our files do not show any recognition of this communication by your company. A short time thereafter the Commission was unofficially advised that certain jurors had been selected by the company and were actually exercising the functions of judges and examiners without notice to or approval by the Commission, and on the 23d of May, 1905, this fact was duly called to your attention by letter. Some time later the director of exhibits appeared before the Commission and admitted that certain examiners and jurors had been selected, without reference to the Commission, to pass upon exhibits of a perishable character. In three communications, each bearing the date of June 3, 1904, you transmitted the names of the jurors referred to, and in the light of the explanations made by the director of exhibits and in your communications, the Commission, with many misgivings as to the regularity of the proceedings and solely to avoid embarrassment to the exhibitors and to the company, approved the names submitted as of the date of their selection by the company.

Aside from the few jurors thus irregularly selected for
emergency work, no jurors were nominated or submitted to the
Commission as required by the rules and regulations prior to
August 1.

The first list of group jurors was transmitted in your
communication bearing date of August 10, delivered to the
Commission about August 15, and the last list was transmitted to
this Commission on October 27.

The respective dates of your letter transmitting nominations of
group jurors and the respective dates of the receipt of the same
by the Commission are as follows:

———————————————|——————|——————-
| |
| Date of | Date same
| letters of | letters
| Exposition | received
| Company. | by National
| | Commission.
———————————————|——————|——————-
Department. | |
| |
Education and Social Economy | Aug. 10 | Aug. 15
| Sept. 6 | Oct. 3
Art Department | Aug. 10 | Aug. 15
| Aug. 23 | Aug. 26
| Aug. 26 | Aug. 28
| Aug. 27 | Aug. 29
Liberal Arts | Aug. 10 | Aug. 15
Manufactures | Aug. 25 | Aug. 29
Machinery | Aug. 10 | Aug. 15
| Aug. 16 | Aug. 20
| Corrected list
| Oct. 18.
| Sept. 7 | Sept. 10
Electricity | Aug. 10 | Aug. 15
| Sept. 9 |
Transportation | Aug. 9 | Aug. 15
| Sept. 8 | Oct. 3
Horticulture | June 3 | June 6
| Aug. 18 | Aug. 19
| Aug. 23 | Aug. 24
Agriculture | Aug. 10 | Aug. 15
| Aug. 13 | Aug. 22
| Aug. 31 | Sept. 3
| Sept. 2 | Do.
Fish and game | Aug. 10 | Aug. 15
| Aug. 31 | Sept. 1
| do | Sept. 3
Mines and metallurgy | Aug. 10 | Aug. 15
| Sept. 6 | Oct. 3
| Sept. 13 | Oct. 27
| Corrected list
| Oct. 18.
Anthropology | Aug. 10 | Aug. 15
Physical culture | do | Do.
Livestock | Aug. 4 | Aug. 19
| Aug. 11 | Aug. 18
| Sept. 1 | Sept. 14
Poultry | Sept. 26 | Oct. 3
Dogs and pigeons | Oct. 17 | Oct. 27
Rabbits | Oct. 22 | Do.
| |
Country. | |
| |
Austria | Aug. 12 | Aug. 15
| Sept. 7 | Sept. 12
Argentine | Aug. 23 | Aug. 26
Brazil | Aug. 17 | Aug. 22
| Aug. 31 | Sept. 1
Belgium | Aug. 12 | Aug. 15
Bulgaria | Aug. 31 | Sept. 1
Ceylon | Aug. 12 | Aug. 15
China | do | Do.
| Aug. 31 | Sept. 1
Cuba | Aug. 12 | Aug. 15
Egypt | Aug. 14 | Aug. 18
France | Aug. 12 | Aug. 15
| Sept. 1 | Sept. 12
Germany | Aug. 24 | Aug. 26
| Aug. 31 | Sept. 1
| Sept. 1 | Sept. 12
| Sept. 4 | Do.
Guatemala | do | Do.
Great Britain | Aug. 12 | Aug. 18
| Aug. 24 | Aug. 26
| Sept. 1 | Sept. 12
Hungary | Aug. 31 | Sept. 1
| Aug. 16 | Sept. 18
Holland | Sept. 8 | Sept. 15
Haiti | do | Sept. 12
India | Aug. 24 | Aug. 26
Italy | Aug. 12 | Aug. 18
| Aug. 31 | Sept. 1
| Aug. 26 | Aug. 30
| Aug. 31 | Sept. 1
| Sept. 7 | Sept. 12
| Sept. 16 | Sept. 17
Japan | Aug. 23 | Aug. 26
| Sept. 7 | Sept. 8
Monaco | Sept. 2 | Sept. 12
Mexico | Aug. 12 | Aug. 18
| Sept. 6 | Sept. 12
Netherlands | Aug. 23 | Aug. 26
Nicaragua | do | Do.
Porto Rico | Aug. 26 | Aug. 30
Portugal | Aug. 24 | Aug. 22
Russia | Aug. 31 | Sept. 1
Sweden | Aug. 12 | Aug. 19
| Sept. 3 | Sept. 13
Siam | Aug. 12 | Aug. 18
Venezuela | Aug. 16 | Do.
| Sept. 1 | Sept. 2
———————————————|——————|——————-

On the morning of October 3 thirteen letters of transmittal signed by you, bearing dates between August 31 and September 27, were delivered to the Commission, inclosing twenty nominations to fill vacancies in group juries, and on October 6 the secretary of the superior jury delivered to the Commission what purported to be a corrected list of group jurors who had actually served. Thereafter, in your letters of October 17, 22, and 24, delivered to the Commission on October 27, you transmitted what you assume to be "a roster of those who served as group jurors in the various departments of the exposition."

This last series of names transmitted by you does not agree with the list delivered by the secretary of the superior jury on October 6, but by checking and comparison we find that the several lists delivered to the Commission between October 3 and October 27 show the names of over sixty persons who served as group jurors without having been submitted to the Commission for approval, and these have not been approved. Other names appear on the lists referred to which were originally approved by the Commission for service in one group who were, without notice to the Commission, assigned to service in other groups. Upon this point it is believed by the Commission that the names should have been resubmitted for approval in order to make the appointments valid, it being evident that the Commission might regard a person as a competent judge of live stock, but incompetent to pass upon the merits of a mineral exhibit or of electrical appliances.

It is obvious from the foregoing record that the rules were not observed by the Exposition Company in the nomination of jurors, and it is further clear that through the failure of the company to observe the rules the Commission was in all instances deprived of opportunity to give notice or to take reasonable time to make proper investigation as to the fitness of nominees, and their willingness to serve, and in many cases no opportunity whatever was allowed for the purposes indicated, and, finally, as to a large number of the jurors, the Commission was not advised of their selection until they had exercised their functions and departed from the grounds.

Disregard of the rules and regulations in this behalf not only defeated the purpose of the law in providing for the exercise of the powers of approval or disapproval on the part of the Commission, but left insufficient time for notice to the persons appointed to enable them to appear and discharge their duties within the allotted period, and in consequence a large number of those approved by the Commission on short notice, being unable to appear within the time stated, were set aside by the company and substitutes named, of whose competency the company could not, in the nature of things, be advised, and of whom the Commission had no knowledge whatever.

Notwithstanding the violation of the rules, and manifest irregularity in the formation of the group juries, we understand you to inform us that the power of approval or disapproval of awards vested in the National Commission by section 6 of the act of Congress shall not be exercised as to any award made in connection with the exposition. To the end that there may be no misunderstanding upon this point, the following quotation from your letter to the acting president of the Commission under date of November 8 is incorporated:

"I desire to state emphatically that at no time have I ever told you, or said anything that would justify you in believing, that the Exposition Company accept the contention that the National Commission has the right to approve or disapprove the awards of the superior jury before they are final. * * * That neither the Exposition Company nor the National Commission had the right to review the awards or overturn them."

The Commission understands your contention to be that the judgment of the superior jury is not only final but conclusive, and that the rule under which this contention is made operates to nullify the language of the act of Congress, which provides that "The awarding of premiums, if any, shall be done and performed by said Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, subject to the approval of the Commission created by this act." Even if such construction could be accepted as plausibly tenable, which the Commission denies, it could only be so regarded by virtue of previous conformity to the rules providing for the nomination of jurors by the company and their approval by the Commission. To commit the Commission to the approval of the conclusions reached by jurors, with whose selection they had nothing whatever to do, can not be accepted as even a colorable compliance with the law. The Commission holds that the judgment of the superior jury is final in so far as the juries are concerned, but that above and beyond the superior jury the Exposition Company and the National Commission have certain statutory duties to perform which they could neither delegate nor ignore.

The files of the National Commission are to-day encumbered with complaints and affidavits which amply vindicate the wisdom of the law in providing for final approval of awards before their promulgation. It is not the intention to here assume that any charge of fraud or misconduct on the part of any person connected with the awarding of premiums has been established, but the fact must be stated that reputable persons have filed charges with the Commission in the form of affidavits and otherwise, alleging such grave misconduct on the part of certain persons who acted in connection with the awards as to bring about an unavoidable necessity for a reasonable investigation before final approval is given to the acts of the persons charged with fraud and misconduct.

The value of each award is dependent upon the credit to which the action of the juries, the company, and the Commission may be entitled at every step from the beginning of the examination to the final approval of the award.

At an informal conference in the course of an attempt to reach a
basis for action, three members of the Commission suggested to
your executive board the propriety of submitting for the
approval of the board of arbitration the following:

First. The awards, as made by the superior jury, are final and binding upon the Exposition Company and the National Commission, unless the same are impeached for fraud, or unless misconduct, amounting to fraud, is proved.

Second. The lists of awards, as made by the superior jury, are to be transmitted to the Exposition Company, and certificates of award shall be authorized by said company; and thereafter said lists are to be transmitted to the National Commission and certificates of award authorized by said Commission, all without further question or investigation, unless the said awards are impeached for fraud or misconduct, as hereinbefore stated.

Third. No complaint or protest as to any of said awards will be received or considered either by the Exposition Company or the National Commission unless the same is made in writing over the signature of some competing exhibitor and substantiated by affidavits or other sworn testimony establishing a prima facie case of such fraud or misconduct in procuring or making of said award.

Your representative did not entertain the proposition for arbitration, according to the suggestions submitted, but proposed to change the first clause so as to confine the impeachment of an award or awards to fraudulent conduct on the part of the superior jury, and thus to exclude inquiries concerning fraud, if any, practiced on any jury by successful competitors, or misconduct on the part of individual jurors, or misconduct on the part of any officer or representative of the Exposition Company, amounting to fraudulent influence and affecting the character of an award, or the course of procedure in reference thereto. The representatives of the Exposition Company declined to consider the third clause suggested.

A communication was received from Mr. Knapp, a member of your arbitration board, under date of November 11, submitting amendments to the suggestions transmitted by the Commission under the same date, as follows:

(1) Change in the first clause so as to read as follows:

"The awards as made by the superior jury are final and binding upon the Exposition Company and the National Commission, except as to any award or awards which are impeached by said company or Commission for fraudulent conduct on the part of said jury in making the award."

(2) Omit entirely the third clause.

The restrictions thus sought to be placed upon the investigation of charges of fraud or misconduct as proposed by the amendment were unsatisfactory.

First. Because the impeachment of an award, as construed by your Mr. Knapp's letter, was to be confined exclusively to the company and the Commission, whereas in the judgment of the Commission any party feeling aggrieved, and having knowledge of the fraud or misconduct complained of, should be permitted to come forward with the charges and proofs.

Second. In confining the investigation of alleged fraudulent conduct to the superior jury alone, the proposed amendment would obviously operate to preclude any inquiry into any charge of fraud or misconduct on the part of any group or department jury or jurors, or any person or persons not connected with the juries, who might, through fraud, bribery, or misrepresentation have illegally or wrongfully influenced or procured an award, the facts concerning which may not have been brought to the attention of the superior jury for investigation.

Third. In confining the investigation to the action of the superior jury your proposed amendment practically precluded the possibility of any investigation, for the reason that the good faith of the superior jury is not regarded by the Commission as open to question, nor has the Commission contemplated as possible any necessity to question the findings of the superior jury on any subject properly and fully presented to, and decided by, that body on the merits.

It has been, and is, the contention of the Commission that fraud or corruption at any stage of the proceedings, whether discovered before or after action by the superior jury, if not investigated and adjudicated by that jury on the merits, should be open to the freest and fullest investigation by the Company and the Commission before final approval of the award.

In conclusion we briefly recapitulate the following points of law and fact, which we hold to be beyond dispute:

First. The law provides that the appointment of all judges and examiners for the exposition shall be approved by the Commission.

Second. The rules provide that all nominations of group jurors shall be made not later than August 1, 1904, except that nominations made to fill vacancies may be made at any subsequent time.

Third. That the nominations of jurors were not made to the
Commission prior to August 1, as required by the rules.

Fourth. That no appointment of a juror could be legal or
effective until approved by the Commission.

Fifth. That a large number of jurors were not nominated to the
Commission until after they had performed their functions and
repaired to their homes.

Sixth. That nominations of jurors were not made to the
Commission in time to permit of any reasonable notice or
investigation as to their fitness or willingness to serve.

Seventh. That in contemplation of law the Commission in approving or disapproving of an award would be called upon to exercise a quasi-judicial rather than a mere ministerial function, or, in other words, that the approval was not contemplated as a perfunctory act, and that, therefore, under no theory of construction can it be held that the Commission, not having been consulted in the appointment of jurors, as provided by the rules, is estopped from investigating charges of fraud or misconduct in procuring or making the awards.

Eighth. That before approval, it is the right, and is, therefore, the duty of the Commission, under the law, where the charges are of a character sufficiently grave and adequately sustained by affidavits, or otherwise, to investigate any charge of fraud made at any stage of the proceedings, either in the selection of the jurors or in procuring or making the awards.

Ninth. That under special rule No. 27 neither the superior jury nor the Exposition Company has the right to issue or promulgate any diploma, certificate, or other evidence of award for exhibitors without the signature of the president of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Commission having been previously attached thereto by authority of the Commission.

Holding these views and representing the Government of the United States in these important transactions, the Commission can not permit the use of its name, nor the name of any of its officers or members, in connection with any diploma, certificate, or other evidence of award while any part of the proceedings rest under adequately supported and uninvestigated charges of bribery, attempted bribery, corruption, fraud, or misconduct amounting to fraud.

In view of the position of your company, as announced in your letter of November 8, from which quotations are herein made, by direction of the Commission, I hereby notify you to refrain from using the name of the Commission or of any of its officers or members in or connected with any diploma, certificate, or other evidence of award for any exhibit or under special rule No. 27, until such time as the proposed award shall have been by you submitted to the Commission for approval, as provided in section 6 of the act of Congress and rule 6 of Article XXII of the general rules and regulations, which rules we hold to have the effect of law until modified or repealed by the consent of the Commission.

Respectfully, THOS. H. CARTER, President.

Hon. D.R. FRANCIS,
President Exposition Company.

A formal acknowledgment of the receipt of the foregoing communication was received from the Exposition Company on November 30, 1904.

No reply has ever been made to the letter or the subject-matter thereof on the merits. The allegations therein contained of flagrant violation of the rules and regulations in the selection and organization of the juries are strongly supported by the records and the silence of the officials of the Exposition Company. The charges of fraud and corruption in connection with certain awards, referred to in the letter, have never been denied nor explained.

The fact that there was a disagreement between the National Commission and the Exposition Company regarding awards became known through the public press, and thereupon the files of the Commission were quickly supplied with letters from exhibitors charging fraud and favoritism, and asking for information as to the status of the awards in the event of certificates of award being issued without the approval of the Commission.

The situation was aggravated by the fact that a concern known as "The Official Ribbon Company," acting under a concession from the Exposition Company, was disposing of ribbons certifying over the signatures of the president and the director of exhibits of the Exposition Company that awards had been made to the holders for the specific exhibits therein named.

Judging from the letters received by the Commission, these ribbons were disposed of indiscriminately and regardless of the fact as to whether or not the purchaser was entitled to the award set forth on the ribbon. Thus exhibitors who had been awarded silver medals by the jurors could and (the Commission is informed in some cases) did buy and display for advertising purposes ribbons certifying that they had received higher awards.

The relations of the Official Ribbon Company to the Exposition Company were based upon a contract, under the provisions of which the Exposition Company received 60 per cent of all moneys paid by the purchasers of the said ribbons.

The Official Ribbon Company carried on its correspondence under the letter heads of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, bearing the names of the president and other officers of said company.

Notwithstanding these communications, the ribbons continued to be advertised and sold, and, at the date of writing this report, they are prominently displayed in the place of business of a director of the Exposition Company, who was an exhibitor at the exposition.

The ribbons were sold to a large number of exhibitors before any awards were legally made, and bore notice that the holder thereof had received the award shown thereon.

Litigation has arisen between the Exposition Company and various exhibitors, seeking redress of wrongs or investigation of alleged fraud, which is now pending in the courts.

Within a few days of the time for filing this report under the provisions of the law, a director of the Exposition Company requested the Commission to specify the awards it would approve without investigation, to the end, presumably, that unchallenged awards might be submitted for approval. The Commission declined to enter upon the matter in this form for four reasons:

First. Because in its judgment every award should be subject to challenge on account of fraud, or misconduct amounting to fraud, at any time before the approval thereof.

Second. Because, through the means suggested, awards made by the company which were under charges of fraud and corruption would escape investigation, and the guilty parties would thereby be relieved from probable prosecution on account of criminal connection therewith, should the subject to be investigated disclose criminal action.

Third. The proposal did not come officially from the Exposition Company.

Fourth. That the proposition was made at so late a day as to preclude the possibility of investigation during the life of the Commission.

Thus it unhappily occurs that the awards must be made, if made at all, without the approval necessary to give them legal effect. This approval the Commission could not give without investigation, in the presence of unexplained charges of irregularity and fraud in certain cases.

By means of procrastination and evasion in the preparation of the subject-matter, in disagreement for arbitration, and finally by the issuance by authority of the company of official ribbons for a money consideration without the knowledge or approval of the Commission, the whole subject of the awarding of premiums is left without final action by the Commission at the date of the termination of its existence.

No list of the awards made has been submitted by the company to the Commission for approval, nor has the Commission ever been advised of the reasons for the persistent refusal of the company to submit the awards for its examination, save and except as set forth in the correspondence on the subject embodied in this report.

The whole matter turns upon the insistence of the Commission to investigate the charges of fraud made and fortified by affidavits in certain cases.

The company was notified that the Commission would accept the findings of the superior jury as conclusive in all cases excepting those in which fraud or misconduct amounting to fraud was charged. Under these circumstances, for the apparent purpose of avoiding such investigation and for no other reason known to the Commission, the company elected to decline agreement upon the matter to be arbitrated and to withhold all of the awards from the Commission. At the time of writing this report the Commission is not advised of any award made by the superior jury, nor does any award seem to have been promulgated, except through the Official Ribbon Company herein referred to, whose operations and whose relations to the Exposition Company should be inquired into by some competent authority.

At midnight on December 1, 1904, the Louisiana Purchase Exposition closed, and thereafter the disposition of the salvage was called the attention of the Commission by a communication from an attorney in St. Louis, which set forth charges of irregularity and discrimination on the part of the company in awarding a contract for the wrecking of the exposition buildings and the sale of the salvage. The attention of the Commission was called to statements from various contractors who had bid on the salvage of the exposition, that their bids had been ignored, and that favoritism had been shown to the wrecking concern which eventually obtained the salvage contract. The Commission decided that in view of the seriousness of the charges the subject required attention, and that statements supported by affidavits should be received setting forth all the facts in connection with the transaction. Prior to taking this step, however, the president of the Commission addressed the following communication to the president of the Exposition Company:

WASHINGTON, D.C., February 28, 1905.

SIR: I am directed to advise you that in the judgment of the National Commission the interest of the United States in the disposition of the property of the Exposition Company is manifest from a perusal of section 20 of the act of Congress approved March 3, 1901, making an appropriation for the exposition and for other purposes.

In the proceeds of the sale and disposition of the property purchased with the funds supplied by the General Government, the city of St. Louis, and the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, the United States is interested to the extent of one-third. Believing that this view of the law is correct, the Commission feels called upon not only to report the amount received from the sale or sales of the property of the exposition, but likewise where the bona fides of transactions is called in question to ascertain and report to the President of the United States the facts and circumstances therewith connected.

These suggestions are called forth by certain statements presented to the Commission, which, if true, affect the interests of the United States as defined by section 20 of the aforesaid act of Congress. These statements relate to the specifications and instructions dated October 1, 1904, signed by Mr. Isaac S. Taylor, director of works, under which bids were to be received for wrecking buildings and structures on the exposition grounds, together with a certain contract bearing date November 30, 1904, between the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company and the Chicago House Wrecking Company, said to be of record in the office of recorder of deeds in the city of St. Louis, book 1811, page 195 and following pages.

There is obviously a marked variance between the property referred to in the specifications and instructions and the property enumerated in the recorded contract. The specifications seemed to require that 50 per cent of the amount of the bid should accompany the same in the form of a check certified by some banking institution in the city of St. Louis, and that the remainder of the amount bid should be paid upon the execution of the contract.

Further, the specifications required that a bond should be filed with the Exposition Company in an amount equal to the bid to guarantee faithful execution of the terms of the contract by the bidder. The specifications expressly reserved copper wire, the intramural railway, the railroad tracks in the buildings, all machinery, etc., whereas the contract executed on November 30 seems to include all the items referred to and many other pieces of property not mentioned in the specifications.

The contract as executed seems to call for the payment of $450,000, of which only the sum of $100,000 was to be paid in cash and the remainder at stated periods in the future. Instead of requiring a bond equal to the amount of the bid the bond called for in the contract is less than 10 per cent of the amount of the bid.

It is alleged:

First. That secrecy was observed in handling the bids for the
wrecking of buildings.

Second. That the Chicago House Wrecking Company was favored from
the beginning.

Third. That the exposition officials rejected higher bids than that of the Chicago House Wrecking Company, so that the latter might have further opportunity to raise its figures.

Fourth. That only a partial list of the property, which did not include many valuable articles, was submitted to bidders outside of the Chicago House Wrecking Company, and that a complete list was refused other bidders.

Fifth. That a written offer of $400,000 cash, and more if lists could be secured, was ignored.

Sixth. That a bid of $450,000, half cash, was presented to the
Exposition Company after the announcement of the sale of the
salvage to the Chicago House Wrecking Company for $386,000.

Seventh. That the contract was eventually given to the Chicago
House Wrecking Company for $450,000, with contract provisions
inferior to the former $450,000 bid made by a party outside the
Chicago House Wrecking Company.

Eighth. That the contract with the Chicago House Wrecking
Company does not adequately protect the Government, the city of
St. Louis, and the stockholders, the $40,000 bond being out of
all proportion to the size of the sale.

Ninth. That the sale of the salvage to the Chicago House
Wrecking Company was consummated over the protests of some of
the directors of the Exposition Company.

Tenth. That the specifications were misleading, in that one item of copper wire, valued at $650,000, was omitted; also 5,000 electric lights, 5,000 tons of iron piping, 3,500 tons of other piping, the railway system on the exposition grounds, the fire apparatus, etc., were omitted.

Eleventh. That, according to an estimate made by several reputable contractors, the property sold was of the reasonable value of $1,955,000.

Twelfth. That the Chicago House Wrecking Company, through undue advantage, obtained inside information as to the extent and value of the property to be sold, and thereby, to the material injury of the United States, secured a contract with the Exposition Company insuring a profit of more than $1,000,000.

The above matters have been called to the attention of the Commission by Mr. Frank E. Richey, attorney and counselor at law, Oriol Building, Sixth and Locust streets, St. Louis, Mo., who accompanies his statements with copies of the contract and specifications referred to and many statements which he believes corroborate the charges he presents.

As the Commission may feel called upon to refer to this important transaction in its final report, it desires to afford the Exposition Company an opportunity to submit such statement or to take such action as it may deem proper in the premises.

Respectfully,

THOMAS H. CARTER, President.

Hon. DAVID R. FRANCIS, President Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, St. Louis, Mo.

To the foregoing communication the secretary of the Exposition Company made the following reply:

ST. LOUIS, U.S.A., March 7, 1905.

SIR: At a meeting of the executive committee of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company held this day the secretary, in the absence of the president, was instructed to prepare and to forward at once a response to the inquiries embodied in the letter of the National Commission bearing date of February 28, as regards the disposition of the salvage of the exposition.

At a meeting of the board of directors of the Exposition Company held September 13, 1904, on the recommendation of the executive committee a special committee on disposition of salvage was provided for "to consider and report at a date as early as practicable a plan for disposing of the property of the Exposition Company." Records and correspondence of the Exposition Company upon the disposal of the property are voluminous and definite. They show frequent meetings of the salvage committee, together with progress reports, consideration, and action by the executive committee and by the board of directors at almost every meeting, until, on the 13th of December, the salvage committee reported its recommendation, with the approval of the executive committee, to the board of directors that the property, with certain exceptions, be sold to the Chicago House Wrecking Company for $450,000. From this sale were excepted the intramural cars and equipments, the property of the General Service Company, and certain other items, which are specified in the contract of sale.

For the cars and equipments the Exposition Company, as shown by the report of the auditor forwarded monthly to the National Commission, has received about $150,000. The property of the General Service Company, including buildings, horses, vehicles, and other physical property, is still in the possession of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company.

At the meeting of the board of directors held December 13, fifty-four members of the board being present, the recommendation of the committee on salvage, approved by the executive committee, that the physical property be sold to the Chicago House Wrecking Company for $450,000, was approved. Not only was the vote unanimous, but the terms of the sale were made the subject of much congratulation by directors. No word of protest or of adverse criticism by any director of the Exposition Company is of record in the proceedings of the board and of the several committees or has come to the knowledge of the officers of the Exposition Company.

The salvage committee, before arriving at terms of sale, as the records show, held many meetings and resorted to various methods to elicit proposals for the property. Early in October sealed bids were invited for the wrecking and removal of the exhibit buildings. These advertisements were published in daily papers and in technical journals not confined to St. Louis. In addition to the advertising, circular letters were sent out to a long list of addresses of persons who had from time to time addressed letters on the subject of the salvage or parts of it to the exposition. Correspondence was taken up by the director of works with persons and firms in various parts of the country who were known to be in the wrecking business. Specifications were prepared and furnished to all who desired them.

On the 10th of November bids were opened by the committee on salvage. They were of very unsatisfactory character. Most of the bidders selected single exhibit buildings or small groups of minor buildings. The highest bid for all of the exhibit buildings opened that date was $50,000. One bid of $325,000 was made for "buildings, structures, salvage of all kinds, and all property owned by the Exposition Company." On the 12th of November the salvage committee rejected all bids. During the following two weeks the salvage committee held frequent meetings. Hearings were given by officers of the exposition to all persons desiring to negotiate for salvage. By wire and by mail persons and firms who might be interested were advised that the property was being offered for sale. Proposals were invited for all physical property of the company, except the intramural cars and equipments and the general service outfit.

The salvage committee waited for proposals in response to this invitation, covering the physical property generally, until nearly the end of November. Three bids were received. The highest was $420,000; the next highest was $300,000. After careful consideration and much negotiation with the various bidders, the salvage committee proposed to the highest bidder, namely, the Chicago House Wrecking Company, which had bid $420,000, to recommend the sale of the physical property to the board of directors, with the exceptions mentioned, for $450,000. This, after some delay, was accepted by the Chicago House Wrecking Company on the 30th of November, and was reported to the board of directors on the 13th of December, and was ratified unanimously.

The records and correspondence showing the proceedings throughout are on file in the office of the secretary, and are ready for inspection and investigation.

The allegations set forth in the letter of the National
Commission as having been made to that body and the answers to
be given to such allegations are:

First. That secrecy was observed in handling the bids for the
wrecking of buildings.

Answer. It was the judgment of the salvage committee that better results could be obtained if secrecy was observed, in so far that the amounts of bids were not made public until the sale was accomplished. The wisdom of this judgment was vindicated in the amount realized for the salvage when compared with the lower bids.

Second. That the Chicago House Wrecking Company was favored from the beginning.

Answer. This is utterly false.

Third. That the exposition officials rejected higher bids than that of the Chicago House Wrecking Company, so that the latter might have further opportunity to raise its figures.

Answer. No higher bid was received either before or after the sum of $450,000 had been agreed upon to be recommended by the committee on salvage.

Fourth. That only a partial list of the property, which did not include many valuable articles, was submitted to bidders outside of the Chicago House Wrecking Company, and that a complete list was refused other bidders.

Answer. No complete list was submitted to the Chicago House Wrecking Company or to any other bidder. The Exposition Company, through the salvage committee and the executive committee, with deliberate intent refused to furnish any list purporting to be complete.

Fifth. That a written offer of $400,000 cash, and more, if lists could be secured, was ignored.

Answer. No such offer was received.

Sixth. That a bid of $450,000, half cash, was presented to the
Exposition Company after the announcement of the sale of the
salvage to the Chicago House Wrecking Company for $386,000.

Answer. No such bid of $450,000 was received; the Chicago House
Wrecking Company did not make a bid for $386,000.

Seventh. That the contract was eventually given to the Chicago
House Wrecking Company for $450,000, with contract provisions
inferior to the former $450,000 bid made by a party outside the
Chicago House Wrecking Company.

Answer. This statement is not true. There had been no bid of
$450,000 on any terms when the sale was closed. The contract
provisions were superior to any made in the bids.

Eighth. That the contract with the Chicago House Wrecking
Company does not adequately protect the Government, the city of
St. Louis, and the stockholders, the $40,000 bond being out of
all proportion to the size of the sale.

Answer. The bond of $40,000 was not taken to secure the payment of the $450,000, or any part of it. The first payment of $100,000 was made on the signing of the contract of sale. The remaining $350,000 was secured adequately by a mortgage on the property covered by the bill of sale. The $40,000 bond was required to enforce other conditions of the contract, namely, those relative to the wrecking and removal of the property under conditions of leases upon which the property stood. A part of the contract required that property be kept insured for the benefit of the Exposition Company until all payments were made. The bond covered these provisions. The Chicago House Wrecking Company made its second payment of $100,000 on February 1. The third payment will be due March 15. The company holds a mortgage on the property to secure the remaining payments, and only releases the property to the Chicago House Wrecking Company as the payments are made.

Ninth. That the sale of the salvage to the Chicago House Wrecking Company was consummated over the protests of some of the directors of the Exposition Company.

Answer. On the contrary, as the records show, the board was unanimous in approval of the contract of the sale and, as stated, there is no record anywhere of objection on the part of any director.

Tenth. That the specifications were misleading, in that one item of copper wire, valued at $650,000, was omitted; also 5,000 electric lights, 5,000 tons of iron piping, 3,500 tons of other piping, the railway system on the exposition grounds, the fire apparatus, etc., were omitted.

Answer. The first specifications, probably those referred to in this paragraph, related only to exhibit buildings. Subsequently the salvage committee informed bidders when bids were taken on all of the physical property that the intramural cars and equipments were to be excepted, and also the property of the General Service Company, which was owned by the Exposition Company. Quantities of wire had been purchased under the contracts permitting return on a percentage of the price paid. As regards the iron piping, bidders were informed of the clause in the ordinance authorizing the use of Forest Park which declared that "sewers, drains, conduits, pipes, and fixtures shall become and be the property of the city." By reference to the contract of sale to the Chicago House Wrecking Company it will be observed that the company sells "subject to whatever rights the city of St. Louis may be entitled to in certain underground pipes, sewers, and conduits in Forest Park." Some of the fire apparatus was loaned or rented to the Exposition Company, and was not owned by it. Many things used by the Exposition Company were sold to it with the privilege of return, or with a contract to return at stipulated amounts or percentages. The exposition officers and the salvage committee answered inquiries, as far as were in their power, made by bidders regarding the property, but from first to last refused to furnish an itemized list. By reference to the contract of sale it will be observed that no list is contained therein, but that the company sells and transfers "the interest, or right, or ownership in or to any and all physical property purchased, constructed, or acquired by the said Exposition Company, excepting as hereinafter mentioned."

Eleventh. That according to an estimate made by several reputable contractors the property sold was of the reasonable value of $1,955,000.

Answer. The Exposition Company has no knowledge of such estimates. If contractors did place such estimates upon the value of the physical property they were singularly lacking in enterprise when they did not come forward with higher bids. The amount realized was the highest bid made for the property.

Twelfth. That the Chicago House Wrecking Company, through undue advantage, obtained inside information as to the extent and value of the property to be sold, and thereby to the material injury of the United States secured a contract with the Exposition Company insuring a profit of more than $1,000,000.

Answer. The Chicago House Wrecking Company obtained no information that was not accessible to and obtainable by any other bidder.

Very respectfully,
WALTER B. STEVENS,
Secretary.

Hon. THOMAS H. CARTER,
_President National Commission,
Louisiana Purchase Exposition.

ST. LOUIS, March 7, 1905.

MY DEAR SENATOR: I send herewith, by direction of the executive committee, a reply to the letter from the Commission of February 28. President Francis is absent from the city, having gone last week to New Orleans. I think I should add something from my personal knowledge. Mr. Richey is well known to me, and has been for years. He must have been badly misinformed to have made such allegations as are contained in the letter. I have all of the minutes of the various meetings and a collection of correspondence which go to show that many of these allegations are without foundation. Some of them, I can see, are inferences drawn from misstatements of the facts and from misunderstandings of the real situation.

I have never so much as heard an intimation that any director of the company, or anyone else who knew of the transactions, protested against the sale or adversely criticised the amount realized. On the other hand, the general impression among directors and on the part of the public seems to be that the Exposition Company realized more than was to be expected. The salvage of the World's Fair in Chicago sold for $80,000, that of Omaha for $37,500, and that of Buffalo for $67,000.

Before the exposition closed the management had begun to dispose of salvage in a small way, but the results were very discouraging. It looked much as if the property of this exposition would go as had that of previous expositions, for a very small fraction of the cost. At one time the directors of the company thought it might be necessary to organize a company and carry the salvage through a series of years in order to realize on it. But the best that could be figured from such a course was from $300,000 to $350,000 for the same property sold to the Chicago House Wrecking Company for $450,000.

The only persons who raised any question about the sale and the amount realized were two disappointed bidders. These bidders were given all of the time they asked. They were furnished information in reply to their inquiries. They could not be given lists of the property of the exposition because, after careful consideration of such lists, it was deemed inadvisable by the exposition to attempt a sale on that basis. It was the conclusion that more could be realized by selling all right and title to the physical property of the exposition. I believe that more was realized than would have been obtained on bids if an inventory had been furnished.

The Chicago House Wrecking Company was doing business on the grounds during the exposition and previous thereto. The officers of that company have been in the wrecking business for years. Looking forward to the time, they saved, as I happened to learn, clippings from the newspapers showing contracts let by the exposition; also clippings showing purchases of various kinds. In fact, for months they were gathering through outside sources all the information they could as to the character of the company's property. In this way they obtained their information as to this property. They were given no list from the company. They were given no advantage over other bidders. I know it to be a fact that the Exposition Company did all in its power to induce other bidders to come from other cities, and stimulated competition. The correspondence and telegrams passing through my hands show this. There was a great deal of property that the exposition had the use of and did not own. This applied to fire apparatus, to electric switch boards, to machinery, to street sweepers, to watering carts, and to a great variety of things that were of utility and were loaned by the manufacturers or dealers, who wished to have them in service for the advertising to be gained thereby.

The city is claiming, under the ordinance from which I have quoted in the other letter, the piping on that part of the ground included in Forest Park, and only to-day wrote asking to know when this pipe could be taken up by the city.

It will afford me pleasure to answer any inquiry or to forward to you any document relating to this salvage matter which you may desire to see.

Can you advise me how long you expect to remain in Washington?

Very truly, yours,
WALTER B. STEVENS,
Secretary.

Hon. THOMAS H. CARTER,
President National Commission,
Louisiana Purchase Exposition.

Having been elected a Senator of the United States from the State of Montana, Mr. Thomas H. Carter, president of the Commission, resigned his office as member of the Commission on March 9, 1905. At a meeting of the Commission held on March 20, 1905, the following letter was received from Mr. Carter, and his resignation as president of the Commission was duly accepted:

WASHINGTON, D.C., March 9, 1905.

GENTLEMEN: Finding that my duties as United States Senator, assumed on the 4th of this month, will so far require my attention as to render it difficult to longer continue a member of the Commission, I have determined to hand my resignation to the president, and preliminary thereto I respectfully resign the position of president of the Commission.

In tendering my resignation I can not refrain from expressing to the Commission jointly, and to the members separately, my grateful appreciation of the unfailing confidence and cordial support with which I have been favored at all times by the members of the Commission, without exception.

It is questionable whether any like body of men, selected from the country at large, has ever acted more harmoniously in the discharge of any public duty.

With deep regret, and only from a sense of duty, I sever my
relations with the Commission, and in doing so wish each of my
associates on the Commission long life and prosperity.

Respectfully submitted.
THOS. H. CARTER.

The honorable LOUISIANA PURCHASE EXPOSITION COMMISSION,
Washington, D.C.

Mr. Carter also addressed a letter to the President of the United States, tendering his resignation as a member of the Commission, which reads as follows:

WASHINGTON, D.C., March 9, 1905.

SIR: My election to the Senate of the United States from the State of Montana imposes upon me duties which render it quite impracticable for me to devote the time and attention necessary to a proper discharge of my duties as a member of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Commission. I therefore respectfully tender you my resignation as a member of the Commission, and in doing so I thank you sincerely for the cordial and unfailing support and consideration you have always extended to me as a member of that body.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,
THOS. H. CARTER.

The PRESIDENT,
Washington, D.C.

Mr. John M. Thurston was thereupon unanimously elected to succeed Mr.
Carter as president of the Commission.

At this meeting Mr. John D. Waite, of Lewistown, Mont., recently appointed by President Roosevelt as a member of the Commission to fill the vacancy caused by the resignation of Mr. Carter, appeared and took his place on the Commission.

At the same meeting the secretary of the Exposition Company requested the privilege of making a personal explanation with reference to the disposition of the salvage.

From his statement it appears that he was not connected personally with the transaction, which was conducted by a committee, of which the president of the Exposition Company was chairman. The secretary did not leave any written statement or explanation, but in general terms said the exposition officials were entirely satisfied with the amount of money received for the salvage; that it was more than they expected, and that they thought the result of the sale was a subject for congratulation.

Upon the suggestion of the Commission the secretary of the Exposition Company on March 23 addressed a communication to the Commission on this subject, of which the following is a copy:

MARCH 23, 1905.

DEAR SIR: By way of supplement to the letter forwarded to the National Commission March 7, and in accordance with suggestion made verbally by the Commission at the meeting Monday, March 20, I submit this statement relevant to the tenth allegation on page 3 of the letter from President Carter, dated February 28, 1905.

Tenth. That the specifications were misleading, in that one item of copper wire, valued at $650,000, was omitted; also 5,000 (500,000) electric lights, 5,000 tons of iron piping, 3,500 tons of other piping, the railway system on the exposition grounds, the fire apparatus, etc., were omitted.

Answer. The Exposition Company purchased under contract with the American Steel and Wire Company, dated April 3, 1902, copper wire to the amount of $320,160.33. The estimated salvage under this contract as furnished by the electrical engineer of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company on or about November 14, 1904, was $121,753.68. Of this estimated salvage the sum of $46,700 was based on the presumption that the Exposition Company could sell in the open market the copper wire in its storehouse that had never been used. The contract with the American Steel and Wire Company, as read to the National Commission, provided that wire in good condition should be taken back by the American Steel and Wire Company at 55 per cent of its original cost. Owing to changes in the head of the electrical department, Mr. Rustin being compelled to give up his position on account of sickness, and owing to changes made in the plans for electric lighting, the Exposition Company at the opening was in possession of this quantity of unused wire, estimated in the salvage to be worth $46,700, if sold at the market value, but worth to the Exposition Company $23,860 if it was returned to the American Steel and Wire Company under its contract at 55 per cent of the original cost. The Exposition Company claimed that this unused and unpacked wire should not be returned under the contract and endeavored to sell it. The company was prevented from making sale by an injunction taken out by the Chicago House Wrecking Company. The Wrecking Company had purchased the Steel and Wire Company's rights of salvage under the contract of April 3, 1903. This injunction was pending in court at the time the sale of salvage was negotiated in November. If the contention of the Chicago House Wrecking Company was sustained it would have reduced the estimated salvage on the copper wire to $97,893.68. The purchase of the general salvage by the Chicago House Wrecking Company ended the injunction proceedings. Copies of the contract with the American Steel and Wire Company and of the contract between the American Steel and Wire Company and the Chicago House Wrecking Company, which are of record in the office of the recorder of St. Louis City and in the office of the county clerk of St. Louis County, will be forwarded to the National Commission if desired. The reason that the copper wire could not be included in the original specifications was the pending injunction proceedings.

The Exposition Company purchased electric light bulbs referred to in the tenth allegation, of different sizes and under different contracts, to the amount of $65,688. The estimated value of lamps not used at the time of the close of the fair was $16,890.

As regards the fire-fighting apparatus it may be explained that most of this material was procured by the exposition on a rental or loan basis. The Exposition Company owned one second-hand La France fire engine, one second-hand Silsby fire engine, one fuel wagon, and four combination chemical hose wagons. The total cost of this apparatus to the Exposition Company was $5,325.

As regards the piping it can be stated that the Exposition Company had no unused piping; the company did not buy pipe and carry it in stock, but paid under contract for the pipe of various sizes after it was laid in the ground at so much per foot. This was the general practice by the company as regards the piping. By reference to the letter of March 7, it will be observed that the answer to the tenth allegation explains why the company could only sell the piping "subject to whatever rights the city of St. Louis may be entitled to in certain underground pipes, sewers, and conduits in Forest Park." It can be stated that this complication of title to the piping applied to two-thirds if not three-fourths of all of the piping which had been laid at the expense of the Exposition Company.

Because the copper wire was involved in the injunction proceedings, because the electric lights constituted a minor item as shown by the figures given above, because the piping was involved in the construction of the city ordinance, because the greater part of the fire apparatus was not owned by the Exposition Company these items were not mentioned in the original specifications.

As stated in the former letter, the intramural cars and equipments were excepted from all offers of sale because the company had already contracted for the sale of them.

After the first bids received under the specifications referred to in the tenth allegation had been rejected because they were in the opinion of the salvage committee wholly insufficient, new bids were asked for all of the salvage of the company including such right and title as it might have in the copper wire, in the electric lights, in the iron piping, in the fire apparatus, etc., with the exceptions of the intramural cars and equipments and the property of the General Service Company. From that time to the acceptance of the proposition to sell the Chicago House Wrecking Company the negotiations proceeded on the plan that the Exposition Company would sell all right, title, and interest to its property with the exceptions of the cars and equipments and property of the General Service Company.

Under the original specifications a certified check for one-half of the amount of the bid was required and the terms were half cash, but this requirement and these terms did not enter into the negotiations following the rejection of the first bids. All bidders showing a disposition to bid for right, title, and interest of the Exposition Company to all salvage except as stated were treated alike. Certified checks were not required on these later bids. The negotiations were carried on verbally with the bidders in turn, it being understood that the company would insist upon what it deemed to be an adequate cash payment when the contract of sale was concluded.

The secretary of the company is authorized to say that the executive committee courts the fullest investigation of all circumstances connected with the sale of the salvage and that if the National Commission shall deem it necessary to include in its report mention of the allegations contained in the letter of the president of the Commission, dated February 28, the committee asks that in justice to the Exposition Company such investigation shall be made and the conclusions of the Commission shall be given.

Very respectfully, WALTER B. STEVENS, Secretary.

Mr. LAURENCE H. GRAHAME,
Secretary National Commission, Washington, D.C.

Another communication bearing on the disposition of the salvage was received from Mr. Stevens, as follows:

MARCH 23, 1905.

DEAR SIR: At a meeting of the National Commission on the 20th the suggestion was made by a member of the Commission that the answer to allegation third did not fully cover the ground. The allegation and the answer were:

That the exposition officials rejected higher bids than that of the Chicago House Wrecking Company, so that the latter might have further opportunity to raise its figures.

Answer. No higher bid was received either before or after the sum of $450,000 had been agreed upon to be recommended by the committee on salvage.

The purpose was to answer that no higher bid than that made by the Chicago House Wrecking Company was received either before; at the time, or after the sum of $450,000 had been agreed upon to be recommended by the committee on salvage.

On the 30th of November, early in the day, the Chicago House Wrecking Company made a bid for $420,000. Up to that time and during that day the next highest bid was under $400,000. Late in the day, the 30th of November, the salvage committee, after conference with all bidders who presented themselves, made the proposition to the Chicago House Wrecking Company that if it would raise its bid from $420,000 to $450,000 the committee would recommend acceptance by the executive committee.

Respectfully, WALTER B. STEVENS, Secretary.

Mr. LAURENCE H. GRAHAME, Secretary National Commission, Washington, D.C.

As a result of the inquiry instituted by the Commission into the disposal of the salvage, statements supported by affidavits were received and the same are appended to this report and marked "Appendix No. 2."

Under the act of Congress the Commission had no power to undertake a more thorough investigation of the charges and allegations made in respect to the manner in which the salvage of the exposition had been disposed of.

Without authority to send for persons and papers, to administer oaths, or to compel witnesses to testify, any further attempt upon the part of the Commission to inquire into the salvage matter would have been futile and ineffective. If any further action is to be taken to ascertain whether or not the financial interest of the United States has been sacrificed by the manner in which the salvage was disposed of, the inquiry must be conducted by some committee or official having these powers, which the Commission did not possess.

A careful perusal of the law under which the Commission was appointed will show the narrow limits of its legal authority, and the records disclose the policy of the Exposition Company not only to confine the Commission strictly within the narrowest limits of the law, but also to question and resist the exercise of its authority in many instances where the law seemed to place such authority beyond question.

From the very beginning the Commission sought to establish harmonious relations with the company, and at all times refrained from contention with its officials as to all matters not vitally affecting the interest of the Government, and endeavored in every possible way to cooperate with the company in promoting the exposition and insuring its success.

It is pleasant to turn from disagreements to achievements. From the scientific, the artistic, and the industrial points of view the exposition was a pronounced success. The munificent and unfailing support given the enterprise by the Government of the United States guaranteed that it would be a great exposition.

Considering the primary appropriation of $5,000,000, the loan of $4,600,000, and the contributions by the direct appropriations and by indirect means through the assignment of officers paid from other appropriations, together with the exhibits from Districts, Territories, and dependencies of the United States, and for the Government exhibit, the aggregate contributions, direct and indirect, to the success of the fair approximated substantially $15,000,000 on the day the gates were opened to the public.

In addition to this proclamations were twice issued by the President inviting foreign nations to participate in the exposition; the consular and diplomatic representatives of the Government were inspired to aid the exposition to the extent of their ability, within the limits of official propriety; the army transports and the vessels of the Navy were generously employed in furtherance of the project, where such employment was found consistent with duty. Never in history has any Government done so much in aid of any like enterprise. With such support from the Government failure was impossible under any rational management.

[Transcriber's note: The easiest way to explain the garbled nature of the following paragraph, is that the first line beginning with St. Louis is a misplaced duplicate of the third line below it, replacing some other typeslug.]

Fortunately the construction of the main exhibit buildings was placed by the directors of the Exposition Company in charge of two gentlemen deserving of special mention on account of the devotion and exceptional ability displayed by each. As chairman of the committee on grounds and buildings, Mr. William H. Thompson, of St. Louis, discharged the duty of director of works. To the united ous devotion to the task assigned him. With rare ability and commendable persistence Mr. Isaac S. Taylor, the talented architect of St. Louis, discharged the duty of director of works. To the united efforts of these gentlemen the exposition and the country are indebted for the magnificent architectural creations which adorned the exposition grounds. Their relations to the work of construction and to the affairs of the company enabled them to act with a necessary degree of self-reliance and independence on their own initiative.

Among the many contributions made by the Government of the United States to the success of the exposition, the exhibit from the Philippine Islands deserves marked attention. This exhibit was so extensive, interesting, and unique that it became the center of predominating interest. Through its various departments a most valuable and accurate knowledge of the Philippine Archipelago was diffused, not only throughout the United States, but throughout the world.

By a fortunate coincidence it occurred that the Secretary of War, who had most to do with the marshaling of this exhibit, had been prepared for the work by his experience as governor of the Philippine Islands. Hon. William H. Taft, as president of the Philippine Commission, and subsequently as governor of the Philippine Islands, manifested a sympathetic interest in the condition of the people, the resources of the islands, and in the proper adjustment of both to their new relationship with the United States. About the time the exposition was projected Governor Taft, whose long and faithful service in the Philippines had endeared him to the inhabitants, was called by the President to accept the portfolio of war. His familiarity with the people and the resources of the islands proved of inestimable value in the preparation of the representation and exhibits at the exposition. Through his efficient Chief of the Insular Bureau, Col. Clarence R. Edwards, the Secretary, with great zeal and effectiveness, addressed himself to the task of securing appropriate representation for the Philippine people.

The administrative work was placed in charge of Dr. W.P. Wilson, of the Philadelphia Museum. A more appropriate selection of an executive officer could not have been made. Industrious, painstaking, and devoted, Doctor Wilson threw all his energy and superior ability into the task assigned him.

In Dr. Gustavo Neiderlein and Mr. Edmund A. Felder, Doctor Wilson had able and faithful lieutenants. Through the combined efforts of such competent and devoted men the Philippine exposition was developed into a revelation of world-wide interest.

The extremes of civilization found in the Philippine Islands were exhibited upon the grounds. The industrial conditions existing in the islands in their various stages of progress were clearly set forth. The millions of visitors who were interested and instructed by this remarkable exhibit must have been deeply impressed with the importance and extent of our new possessions in the Orient.

It is quite impossible to compute the value to the American people of this Philippine exhibit. In giving to the country the basis upon which to form a just conception of the character and possibilities of our new possessions the Philippine department alone fully justified the interest of the nation in the Louisiana Purchase Exposition.

The official report of the Philippine exhibit, filed with the records of the Commission, is replete with interest and will justify careful perusal.