THE COLUMBIAN EXPOSITION. 



59 



esting features of the groups and classes composing that depart- 

 ment, accompanied by a list of exhibitors who have received 

 awards, with the reports of the individual judges giving the 

 reasons and considerations therefor." These reports, together 

 with the full and final reports of the chiefs of the departments, 

 shall constitute the history of the Exposition. 



A Judge's Opinion. — So much has been said against the 

 single-judge system at the Exposition, that any inside light 

 which may be thrown upon it will be welcome and valuable in 

 future enterprises of a similar character. The following criti- 

 cisms are prepared by Warren H. Manning, who was a member 

 of two of the juries in the Depatment of Horticulture, and who 

 is therefore well qualified to speak understanding^ of the 

 subject. 



" I believe that there is merit in the single jury system, that 

 a single juror who is a competent expert, is better able to pass 

 a correct judgment independently, than if he were open to the 

 direct influence of other less competent men who were more 

 self assertive and stronger willed than himself; and that the 

 opportunity for illegitimate influences is no greater with a sin- 

 gle juror than with a number of jurors. But it was evidently 

 a mistake to attempt to apply a theory, which had never been 

 worked out on a large scale in actual practice, to an affair as 

 extensive as the World's Columbian Exposition, especially as 

 there was not time to thoroughly plan and organize a system. 

 No better service can be done to help establish that which is 

 meritorious in the single jury system than to point out defects 

 that were apparent. 



" The theory was, that a single expert juror was to make 

 an examination of each exhibit assigned to him, and with 

 respect to those deemed worthy of an award he was to ' formu- 

 late in words the specific points of excellence or advancement 

 disclosed thereby.' He was to present his report to the jury 

 (made up of all the jurors of the department or division) at 

 some later period, which would confirm his findings, and for- 

 ward his report in writing, or reject them and have a new 

 examination and report made by another juror, or, in the event 

 of further disagreement, by a special committee appointed by 

 the Executive Committee of Awards, and as a last resort by 

 the departmental jury. 



" This plan of proceedure was manifestly impracticable in 

 the horticultural department where so many displays were of 

 perishable flowers or fruits which could not be replaced, many 

 of which had disappeared long before the jury had assembled. 

 It would have required a practically continuous session of the 

 jury from January to November, 1893, for judgment was passed 



