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