Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1905-06-17
Dispute Over the Awards.

The president of the national commission,
Thomas H. Garter. senator-elect from Mon
tana, declines to approve the awards. and
hence his name does not appear upon the
diplomas.
Under the rules of the exposition. made
in conformity with the act of Congress, the
Jury of awards was international. and each
nation represented by exhibitors contributed
its share of members of that jury. All per
sons dissatisfied with the awards had the
right of appeal to superior jury, made
up of representatives of all nations, which,
under the rules, was the highest and mai
authority. The act of Congress provided
that "the awarding of premiums shall be
done and performed" by the st. Louis cor
nora ton Subject to the approval of the
commission" The corporation and the for
eieners construed this language to mean
that the commission had the right to SUPER
wise the method and the manner and the
rules and regulations under winch the act
of awarding of premiums done and
performed. President Carter and his as
sociates construed it as giving them author
ity to express their opinion as to the JUS
tice of each of the $1,000 awards. In other
words they claimed the right of veto upon
the acts of the superior Jury and the au-
thority to say whether the decisions of that
body should stand. Both the foreigners and
the Americans composing the superior jury
dissented. They held that, under the rules.
the commission had no time and no right
to review the acts of the superior jury;
that II was contrary ~ lHe
usages and customs of international eX-
positions; that the commission was COM
posed exclusively of Americans, none of
whom were experts in any of the claSSifi-
cations and that they could not intelligent
ly determine the merits or justice of any
of the awards, even if they had the time
and opportunity 10 make an examination.
They argued that the act of Congress re-
uuired the approval of the commission for
the plan, method and system of awarding
premiums, but did not authorize it to
Iect the persons to whom the awards should
be made Foreign exhibitors came to the
exposition with the understanding that the
rules and regula with which they had
beeu furnished would be observed; and these
rules and regulations, which were approved
by the national commission, provided that
the awards made by the superior jury
should by final. Hence, 1t would not only
be a breach Of contract but of good faith,
to ignore or violate that provision of the
rules
Action CT Foreign Commissioners.
Commissioner Iewald of Germany and
other foreign commissioners prepared able
arguments to sustain their position, in
which they were supported by Prof. ]. H.
Gore. the representative of SIAM who has
taken part in a large number of expositions
and is regarded as high authority on the
subject of awards The directors Of the
corporation su~.eired the foreign commits
sioner1 snd 6ecieea that the national COM
mission baT "a right to review the decisions
of the vi - jury; and there the matter
STAN
In the / +IC however, a brief has
ben prS--red for %.Eer tation to Congress-
IN ccFe the natter should be brought be-
iorc t.. body y X winter, and 1t has been
already subr 45oa to the President and