New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1876-10-31
THE EXHIBITION A WARDS.

WHY WAS THE SYSTEM CHANGED'
STATEMENT OF ONE or THE CoMMIssIoNERS-NlNh
HUNDRED APPLICATIONS FOR AWAlDs-THE RE-
PoRIs NOT SIGNED BY JUmEs OF EXPERTS But
BY THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL.
FROM THE REGULAR CORRESPONDENT OF Tx rRiBCStl
PHILADELPHIA, Oct. 29.-The members OF the
Committee on Appeals who are overhaullng the
Centennial awards think that injustice was dohe
them i'm recent letter to TIE TRIBUNE, IN winch II
was stated that they were making alterations III 'hc
reports. and were through the machinery of board
of appeal Judges issuing supplemental awards not
recommended by the regular judges. member OF
the committee. who is a very energetic and mteil-
gent commissioner from an Eastern state writes
letter on the subject. Although not intended for
publication. feel at liberty to print the greater
part of the letter because it explains tie position
and action of the committee The commissioner
says
We have not examined an article or made an award
In one single judge OF former group hiouEl W
n RECOMMENDATION for award signed by hihNtH anu
ammo we'd by one or more experts claiming injustice mao
been done an exhibitor We simply approved H. ana Stll
IL 10 the Commission FOR their action As 10 tah"hE
with tle rcuOrts will say have never altered OF
changed a word or letter in single report Wmc nun
drcs nave begged to do we have scaoN refused
There were two where the judge who wrote the re-
ports requested rs in writing to change icW trivial
words We declined 70 DO hut simply pinned the re-
quest the reports and sent them 10 Tue COMMISSION II
heir action. We have acted on about 800 c@'cS-cei-
jaiuy not large number, considering mat tht Wholc
world is exhibiting. We listen 10 all read, dud carciu.y
consider their statements. and II hey come "iih ne
rules cOyerru. action simply rticr them 10 Tue
group Judges Appeals, with all the actS presented
to us for their c0nGderatou 70 report OF dcl uloH a.
they deem proper. have doubt great many, lr"h1
hy the larger norton viii urUyC To have been larry tN
auIincd and n discrimination refused whc th"oc indl
have not fairly examined, and arc really Itnt "E
an NV dlu VIII NV vi. T rr We are DOM. *
ioI thcli ma. act"u ,tI i,,, ,',rb needed and
when properly understood WILL, am confident, receive
the ful. approval OF all iaiI-mmdcd men.
l.. Ns..T hose rttTl 8
conversation with three members of the Committee
on Appeals, who agreed that il was the Commission
and not the judges who made the awards; that the
iudges we're IL eject the clerks of the Commission,
hired to gather information about the exhibits and
make report, to their employers; and that it was
not only the right hut the duty Of the Commission
10 change those reports so to make them conform
tn thcir ideas, To what extent they were making
,uch alterations | was not informed. II was but
far 10 ,puOse that possessing the power they would
WELD 70 solicitations 20 exercise II. The abandon
ent at the eleventh hour of the plan OF holding the
iudrrs responsible for the awards, and publishing
their signed reports recommending them, certainly
warranted the apprehension that the Commission
through its Committee on Appeals was about lo en-
gage in the alteration of reports on a I'Fre
scale | am glad 10 be assured that they are
not. | wish could feel equally certain that among
tine 500 applicatonS for awards sent Ia the Appeal
Judges great many will not be granted that were
rejected for good cause by the regular judges. These
Appral Judges represent less than one-half Of the
proup, into which the regular judges were divided
and two or three Of them are new selections, never
having served on any group. believe they are all
Americans. so that the foreigners, who gave an in
tcratoual character to the reports, are to nave no
hand in this revision Of the work.
The serious complaint that lie, AGAINST the recent
action on the subject Of award, doe, not, however
concern the Appeal Judges or the committee, he
ra,se we cannot know whether their work sill, on
the WHOLE be good or bad; but 1t concerns To"
determination of the Commission 10 destroy
the vital feature of the new American
system Of awards, which we pricl oursrlvc-
mon n superior 10 all systems deyssi fIr foreign
eybibitions-I mean the reports signed 10y jErcs OF
experts This matter is not touched upon - tho let
ter printed above. The public and tho exhibitors
were promised signed reports, written hv Judges Of
eminent qualifications for examining the articles in
the various departments of the Far They are now
mt off with awards signed only by Droctor-Gcunral
Goshor and Secretary Campbell. No reason has
been publicly announced for this important and
wholly uuexpectcd change in the most essential
feature of the exhibition work. If people jump at
the conclusion that IL made IN order To enable
the Commission to grind out great gl~t OF supple
mentary awards and give them the same value as
the original awards recommended by the regular
group judges, surely II Is no wonder. f. s