erstand
you to inform us that the power of approval or disapproval of
awards vested in the National Commission by section 6 of the act
of Congress shall not be exercised as to any award made in
connection with the exposition. To the end that there may be no
misunderstanding upon this point, the following quotation from
your letter to the acting president of the Commission under date
of November 8 is incorporated:
"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 accept the contention that the National
Commission has the right to approve or disapprove the awards of
the superior jury before they are final. * * * That neither the
Exposition Company nor the National Commission had the right to
review the awards or overturn them."
The Commission understands your contention to be that the
judgment of the superior jury is not only final but conclusive,
and that the rule under which this contention is made operates
to nullify the language of the act of Congress, which provides
that "The awarding of premiums, if any, shall be done and
performed by said Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, subject
to the approval of the Commission created by this act." Even if
such construction could be accepted as plausibly tenable, which
the Commission denies, it could only be so regarded by virtue of
previous conformity to the rules providing for the nomination of
jurors by the company and their approval by the Commission. To
commit the Commission to the approval of the conclusions reached
by jurors, with whose selection they had nothing whatever to do,
can not be accepted as even a colorable compliance with the law.
The Commission holds that the judgment of the superior jury is
final in so far as the juries are concerned, but that above and
beyond the superior jury the Exposition Company and the National
Commission have certain statutory duties to perform which they
could neither delegate nor ignore.
The files of the National Commission are to-day encumbered with
complaints and affidavits which amply vindicate the wisdom of
the law in providing for final approval of awards before their
promulgation. It is not the intention to here assume that any
charge of fraud or misconduct on the p
|