Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1893-08-24
MES. nALLs POSITION.
The Commissioners from Delaware of the
Ladies' Board Of the Worlds Fair Makes
n Public Statement.

Ladies' Board Of the Worlds Fair Makes
n Public Statement.
Mrs. j. Frank Ball, member of the
Ladies' Board of Worlds Fair Com
mission, has given public statement TO
the press in regard to her disagreement
with the chairman Of the committee of
awards, Mrs. Virginia G. Meredith of In
diana, of which committee Mrs. Ball was
secretary, which places Mrs. Ball in
most praiseworthy light before the pub
lie. Her action was altogether in the
direction of opposing political Jobs, and
immediately 10 the end that all the
states of the Union might have, as far
| as possible, an equable and due share of
the representations the juries ofawards.
Another point that Mrs. Ball most
strenuonsly contested for was that no
one but proved experts should be
| placed on the list of jurors of awards.
In the various meetings OF the commit
tee, preparatory to the choosing of the
jurors, this honest policy of the Della
| ware member, which was asserted on
every necessary occasion, was the cause
which ultimately aroused the chairman's
anger and subsequently, her open and
uhdlsgnised opposition to Mrs. Ball. The
latter lady was only too well grounded
in her course of action, for the chair
man, Mrs. Meredith, had let drop GER
tain expressions at the meetings which
clearly enough indicated that in her adj
yocacy of certain jurors she was actuated
by the needs of paying off political
| debts.
All this was so clear at length to the
Delaware member, that in honor bound
she had absolutely no alternative but
that of firmly and persistentiy voting
| against any appointment that did not
come up before the board with clear
endorsements of expert qualification
for the position asked.
| One important jury position was
4 asked consent of from the board by the
chairman, simply on the grounds that
her protege was good wife and
mother" This would have been laugh
able, were it not realized at the same
time by Mrs. Ball that if she did vote
for the appointment some State of the
Union would suffer AMI not be properly
represented. The committee comprised
five members. One of these was con-
annually absent This left the chairman,
Mrs. Meredith, the secretary Mrs Ball)
and two other members. OF course
when the vote was put there were only
three to cast their votes, as the chairman
did not vote. The two voted in &C.
qniescence with the chairman's PROPOSE
ton. Mrs. Ball voted in the negative
As some one remarked "two beats one
any day." So Mrs. Meredith won heI
point and the appointment. Buthappi!y
1t was not done without the Delaware
member voting against the job, and Of
that fact going on record. Incidents Of
this nature give the key to the whole
story of Mrs. Merediths malice, hel
continued prosecutions Of the Delaware
member, until the latter was forced tx
make public statements to the press.
AT one of the meetings of the board
Mrs. Ball saw her duty in the direction
of supporting the charges of woman
who had accused Mrs. Meredith o.
I malice in her treatment of the appoint
ment Of judges from South Carolina
Mrs. Ball endorsed her strongly with ,
letter, which, without her knowledge
slipped into print. At the followin,
!, session of the board an unsuccessful
effort was made to get a resolution 0
censure passed against Mrs. Ball. i
was promptly laid upon the table ant
, all record of it ordered expunged from
, the minutes.
, Mrs. Meredith then preferred charge
/ against Mrs. Ball to which the latter re
/. piled, August 9th, as follows:
/ desire to preface my remarks by say
: ing that personal differences between tn
committee on awards and myself have ha
nothing at all to do with my present advC
cacy of the cause Of the States unreprt
1 sented on the board of judges. My position
in defence of the rights OF those States t
representation is no new one, for Ion
time ago before Our committee | Intro
duced the following resolution:
a If the number Of judges accredited t
I one State be SO large as to preclude th
9 acceptance of judges from other an
a equally important States, therefore, be it
I Resolved, That more equitable division
a of judges be attempted.
Z Unfortunately" Mrs. Ball adds, thi
q resolution did not meet with a second
4 Other main points of Mrs. Balls dill
ference with Mrs. Meredith were thu
she was opposed to the presence of Mr.
Meredith's sister, during the chairman
!. absence, and her acting in that lady
q official capacity. She sat as oversee
n with no right or title whatever to til
/. place.
v Mrs. Ball objected to the ruling {
h Mrs. Meredith, as chairman, that tn
d other members of the committee coul
v not draw salary during recess. Mr.
u Meredith was ali safe because her salar
Is of $500 a year went right alon.
II whether there was a committee meetin
/. or not. On appeal to Judge Garvin {
% the auditing committee the latter rule
$ that Mrs. Ball was right and that fl
). every day spent away from home q
d committee business the members we
IS entitled to compensation.
= Another complaint was in regard {
1t the neglect of the chairman in inform
Ie ing the members OF matters of impo
VI lance occurring. Still another was tt
is petty persecution of Mrs. Ball by IL
d chairman simply because the form
N showed the determination to do Ii
whole duty as she saw it and not as ii
chairman saw 1t.
Another cause of complaint was IL
k chairman's evident disposition to a.
"a journ the committee summarily and
or remain herself in undisputed possesslc
a. OF the committees affairs. Again Mi
al Meredith's efforts in the direction
t. star chamber proceedings against MI
., Ball and of preventing her presen
r, and therefore inability to be cogniza
TX OF any charges made.
There was an investigation of h
whole matter of differences, when Il
board acted favorably to Mrs. Ball.
~ Mrs. Meredith subsequently broug
y before the board request that MI
u Ball be retired from service on the col
n mittee of awards. Mrs. Meredith wit
- drew the request ON the following da