Final Report of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Commission Part 17

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 a.s.sume 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 embarra.s.sing 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 pa.s.s 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 a.s.sured 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 a.s.sured us he had said to hundreds of exhibitors, that after the action of the group juries these awards would have to pa.s.s 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 a.s.surance 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 partic.i.p.ated 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 pa.s.s the matters that we think would properly belong to that body up to the superior jury; consequently the princ.i.p.al 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 a.s.surance 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 advertis.e.m.e.nts 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 advertis.e.m.e.nts 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 advertis.e.m.e.nt 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 advertis.e.m.e.nt 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_.