Chapter XX: Part 20

As with Germany a score of years previously, when the time came Japan was ready, not only with munitions of war, but with better topographical knowledge of the enemy’s country than they themselves possessed. The Emperor, whose dynasty antedates the Christian era, gave his people a constitution, and stretching his hand towards Korea he helped her in the same direction. He had Japan’s army and her navy drilled by expert European officers. Arsenals and extensive manufactories for the implements of war were started, with European superintendents. The latest and best of ships were both bought at foreign marts and made at home. Her students were to be found in the universities of the world. Her agents were sent to study in their capitals the economy of every government and the machinery of their executive departments. To find the best and assimilate it seemed the principle of her progression, so that both in military skill and the knowledge of diplomacy she acquired the ability to hold her place among the nations of the civilized world. A war alone was needed to prove that this was a fact.

Japan’s navy consisted of four armored cruisers and eight vessels of 3000 tons each. This was a much lighter fleet than that of China, but swifter. China’s navy had been trained by an able English naval chief, Captain Lang. Her outfit of ships was, perhaps, superior to that of Japan, consisting of five armored vessels, nine protected cruisers, and torpedo boats besides. The principal battle of this Chino-Japanese war was fought on September 15 at Ping Yang, an old capital of Korea, situated at the meeting of several roads. The Japanese landed troops at Gensan, on the northeast, and at Hwang-jo, on the northwest, coast of Korea. These formed the right and left wings of the army whose centre, under General Nodju, advanced from Seoul, about one hundred miles to the south, of which the Japanese were already in possession. Only one wing of the army met opposition in its march, a small battle having been fought. The forces, so far as we can learn, were between twenty and thirty thousand of Chinese and between thirty and forty thousand of Japanese. Japan’s twenty-four years of scientific preparation, her study of the art of war, the practicability of her strategic movements,—admired by the soldiers of the world,—left China, with her old semi-barbarian methods, no chance for victory.

The battle was a bloody one; the defeated Chinese fled until they were on the other side of the Yalu River, in Manchooria. Seven hundred (some accounts say fourteen thousand) Chinese were captured, two thousand killed and wounded. The army continued fighting and conquering until practically the province of Manchooria was in Japan’s possession, as well as the peninsula of Liaotung, terminating with Port Arthur.

The battle of Yalu, or Hai Yun Tao, afforded the first practical test of modern vessels, guns, and projectiles in Asiatic waters. Ping Yang has been called China’s Sedan, and Yalu, Japan’s Trafalgar. Japan had nine cruisers and two converted cruisers wherewith to fight twelve Chinese warships and four torpedo boats. It is said that Japan used melanite shells. The fleet of Chinese warships, convoying transports with ten thousand troops, entered the Yalu River. The next day, September 17, the Japanese fleet, under Admiral Ito, went out to meet them. A European officer on a Chinese vessel says: “Passing along the Chinese line, the Japanese poured as heavy a fire as they could bring to bear upon each ship in succession, and, while they had sea-room, circled round their opponents. The Japanese state that no Japanese war-ship was lost and only three seriously injured.” A Chinese officer says: “As soon as the Chinese on the port side had brought their guns to bear and had obtained range accurately, the Japanese would work around and attack the starboard side.” Four ships were destroyed and two badly injured. One of the Chinese ships was said to have been hit two hundred times. The Chinese ironclads that escaped were later sunk off Wei Hai Wei. Port Arthur, captured October 21, was filled to overflowing with ammunition, grain, and other supplies.

China made three informal overtures for peace. Finally, Li Hung Chang went from Tientsin to Shimonoseki, to make terms, on the 19th of March, 1895. By the treaty there made, May 17, China recognized the independence and autonomy of Korea, ceded certain territory in Manchooria, all the islands in the eastern part of the bay of Liaotung and the northern part of the Yellow Sea, Formosa, and all islands belonging to it, and the Pescadores group. Two hundred million Kuping taels were exacted as indemnity, to be paid in eight installments, one every six months. The inhabitants were to sell out and leave, or in two years to be Japanese subjects. Russia, Germany, and France recommended that Japan should not permanently possess the peninsula of Feng Tan, and Japan agreed to their suggestions.

Formosa, as a strategetical post, is of the greatest value. Korea and Japan now control absolutely the Japan Sea. It was only after four months of fighting that Japan completely conquered the Formosans and had all her new possessions under her control.

China paid Japan an additional $30,000,000 for the release of Port Arthur and Liaotung peninsula. China was well pleased. But in April, 1897, Russia herself had obtained possession of Port Arthur and Talien Wan, and in December the Germans received Kaio Chao, the finest naval station of the province of Shantung. France subsequently obtained Kwang-Chau, the best port of Wangsi; and England, though not joining these powers in the demand in favor of China in 1895, obtained Wei Hai Wei in 1897.

GRECO-TURKISH WAR.—In 1895, the fearful atrocities committed by the “unspeakable” Turk began to assume appalling proportions. During three years one hundred thousand Cretans were murdered. February 8, 1897, the Cretans proclaimed union with Greece. The Greeks, unable longer to endure the sufferings of their kindred, determined to help them.

Prince George left for Crete with a torpedo flotilla February 10; Colonel Vassos, aide-de-camp to the king, followed with fifteen hundred men and two batteries on the 13th. Prince Nicholas led a regiment of artillery to the Thessalian frontiers. The powers sent a collective note of protest to Greece, but it was not heeded. Colonel Vassos landed in Crete on the 14th. Sailors from the fleet of the powers occupied the coast towns of Crete. Pasha Berovitch resigned and returned to Constantinople. Greek reserves rallied promptly. Volunteers offered. Colonel Vassos established headquarters in the mountainous interior at Sphakia.

March 18, the powers blockaded Crete. On the 27th, Crown Prince Constantine proceeded to the Turkish frontier. On April 5, the powers declared no gain should accrue to the combatant who approached Thessalian borders. April 8, three thousand Greeks crossed near Krania, began fighting, and were driven back. On April 17 Turkey declared war. On the 18th, a battle of twenty-four hours, in Milouna Pass, crowned Turkish arms with victory. Another hard fought battle, at Reveni, discomfited the Greeks. Greeks passed the Arta River and Greek ironclads bombarded Prevessa. On the 19th, the Turks were in Thessaly and the Greeks in retreat to Larissa. After terrific battles Tornavo and Larissa, on the 25th, fell into the hands of the Turks. Colonel Smolenski fought desperately at Valestino, but had to yield; and Volo also fell to the Turks. The Turks occupied Pharsaos on May 6. Greece asked the powers for peace, May 8; Cretan autonomy was agreed to, and Turkey permitted armistice on the 15th. The war closed. Turkey was forced to yield all Thessalian territory, and Crete was relieved of Turkish oppression. Greece was forced to withdraw all support from Crete and pay $20,000,000 indemnity.

The remarkable feature of this war was the intensely hard fighting from start to close, and the disposition of the powers to assist Turkey by interfering with the Grecian navy. Frequently the Austrians helped the Turks by placing their guns in position. It was only when the Sultan conquered Thessaly and threatened to keep it that the powers interposed.

The crime committed by the powers against civilization and Christianity by their action seems incredible, even though the peace of Europe was thereby secured.

ENGLAND’S WARS IN THE SOUDAN.—The Khedive of Egypt had obtained great loans from Europe. England and France took financial control of the country. Arabi Pasha inaugurated a rebellion and fortified Alexandria. Many Europeans were murdered, and England bombarded the city, taking possession July 12, 1882. General Wolseley, at Tel el Kebir, September 13, fought and defeated Arabi, who fled leaving two thousand dead. France withdrew from the financial arrangement. The English remained to put the Egyptians in condition for self-government. England has remained ever since.

Mohammed Ahmed arose in the Soudan, proclaiming himself El Mahdi, the Mussulman Messiah. The barbarian hordes flocked to his banner. He defeated the Egyptians in four engagements, October, 1883. The Anglo-Egyptian force of ten thousand men, under General Hicks, was destroyed, only two escaping. General Gordon was sent to the relief of the Egyptian army. He reached Khartoum, February 18, 1884. The Mahdists besieged the city. Gordon sent for reinforcements. England was so slow in sending them that they arrived two days too late. Khartoum was captured through treachery, and Gordon, the most beloved of English soldiers for his saintly and heroic character, was put to death on January 27, 1885.

General Sir Horatio Herbert Kitchener was made Sirdar in 1890. He started from Cairo with one thousand British and fifteen thousand Egyptians, black and fellah troops, building a road across the desert as he advanced, and engineering his gunboats up the Nile. The distance from his base, at Cairo, to his first storehouse, at Wady Halfa, is eight hundred miles. April 8, 1898, was fought the battle of Atbara, a fort at the point where the Atbara River enters the Nile. Here Mahmud, the commander of the barbarians, was captured and his army of twelve thousand infantry destroyed. Osman Digna got away with the greater part of the cavalry, numbering four thousand.

The force was about a month reaching Wady Hamed, and, September 1, was in sight of Omdurman. The Sirdar’s line was drawn up in crescent form, with Omdurman and Khartoum for its centre. In this position was fought the first battle of Egeda, in which twenty-two thousand of the Dervishes fell. The Khalifa and Osman Digna fled with a scant handful of followers, and are now said to be bandits in the Kordofan. The number of the annihilated army of the Mahdists will never be known. The British loss of whites was less than two hundred, and the native loss less than three hundred. The fire of the barbarians was generally too high to effect great injury. September 2 will be a marked day in England’s calendar. The Sirdar marched into Khartoum, the Union Jack was raised, and beneath its floating crosses his chaplains performed Gordon’s funeral ceremonies on the spot where he was slain nearly fourteen years before.

THE BOER WAR.—By the treaty of 1881 Great Britain claimed suzerainty over the South African (Transvaal) Republic and Orange Free State. These Republics claimed that by the treaty of 1884 Great Britain gave up her claim of suzerainty. Here arose an issue which was aggravated by the discovery of diamonds at Kimberley and of gold at Johannesburg, followed by the Jameson raid, which, shorn of its disguise, was notice to the Boers that Great Britain desired and designed to occupy and absorb their two Republics. The diplomatic war went on for years between President Kruger, of the Transvaal, and Mr. Chamberlain, Great Britain’s Colonial Secretary. It culminated in an ultimatum on the part of Kruger, on October 9, 1899, which Chamberlain rejected. Both sides had been preparing for this, and on October 11, the outbreak of the war, Great Britain had already an army of 25,000 men in South Africa, while the Boers had mobilized an equal, if not superior, army of effectives. The Boers immediately invaded Natal and Cape Colony, shutting up General White and his army in Ladysmith, and Colonel Powell and his forces in Mafeking. Kimberley was also besieged. The initial battles were numerous, fierce, and generally favorable to the Boers. Great Britain’s eyes were speedily opened to the gravity of the situation. She hurried large reinforcements to the scene till her armies far outnumbered those of the Boers. Yet her best generals, as Buller at Tugela River, and Methuen, at Magersfontein, continued to meet with disastrous defeats. Lord Roberts, in connection with General Kitchener, was sent, January 10, 1900, to supersede the blundering generals, and to organize a new campaign. It was seen that direct battle against the Boers was bound to end in defeat. So Roberts was provided with an overwhelming army, estimated at 225,000, and he at once entered upon a war of strategy. His northward advance was general along his lines, thus keeping the Boers divided. He flanked them out of their strongholds. By February he had invaded the Orange Free State, and raised the siege of Kimberley. On February 27 he captured General Cronje and his force of 4000 men, and on March 13 took possession of Bloemfontein, the Free State capital, whence he issued a proclamation annexing the republic under the name of Orange River Colony. On February 28 the siege of Ladysmith was raised, and shortly after that of Mafeking. The Boers continued to fight doggedly, all the while inflicting heavy losses on their enemy, but resistance was futile against such overwhelming odds. They were gradually forced from one position to another in the direction of Pretoria, the Transvaal capital. On March 5 Presidents Kruger and Steyn joined in peace proposals, which were rejected. On March 12 they made an appeal to the nations for mediation. All refused to mediate. On March 27 the Boers lost their ablest general in the person of General Joubert, who died at Pretoria. By May 12 Kroonstad, the second Free State capital, had fallen into Lord Roberts’ hands. The Vaal River was then crossed and the Transvaal invaded. On May 31 the British army entered the important town of Johannesburg, and hastened toward Pretoria, which was captured on June 5, 1900. President Kruger and General Botha had left a few days before, the former in the direction of the Portuguese port of Lorenzo Marques, the latter with the remnant of the Boer army to the mountains beyond Pretoria. On September 3 Lord Roberts declared the Transvaal annexed to Great Britain under the name of the Vaal River Colony. Generals Botha and De Wet continued a guerrilla warfare far past the end of the century. President Kruger accepted the protection of Holland, and sailed thither on October 20, 1900. Lord Roberts arrived in England in December, 1900, to receive his honors. At the turn of the century the South African problem was a most wearying one for Great Britain.

THE BOXER UPRISING.—The defeat of China by Japan in 1894, the ambition of European powers to occupy her ports and enlarge their “spheres of influence,” the ominous threats to partition her territory, soured the Manchu dynasty and the people of northern China against foreigners. The Empress Dowager deposed the young Emperor, seized the reins of government, and catered to that reactionary and hostile spirit which culminated in the “Boxer” uprising. These mobs began the destruction of missions, the murder and expulsion of missionaries, and concerted attack against everything that savored of foreign direction and influence. The Chinese regular soldiers were either helpless before them or in sympathy with them. By May, 1900, all the powers represented at Peking stood aghast at the startling fact that their respective legations were beleaguered in Peking, and liable to be murdered. Warships were instantly ordered to Taku. By June 1, 1900, twenty-three vessels had reported,—nine Russian, three British, three German, three French, two American, two Japanese, one Italian. A force of 2000 soldiers was landed from these, and immediately started for Peking, under command of the British Rear-Admiral Seymour, for the rescue of the legations. This force was defeated by the “Boxers,” and compelled to retreat to Tien-Tsin with heavy loss. An attempt to torpedo the Taku harbor was resented by the warships. They bombarded and blew up the Taku forts. In this action the American warships did not participate. The “Boxers” swarmed in Tien-Tsin, and an allied force of 4000 men was sent thither to capture it. In their first attack, on July 9, they were repulsed with heavy loss. Being reinforced up to 7000 men, their second attack, on July 13, was successful. The city was taken, and made the base of further operations against Peking, 80 miles up the Pei-ho. The allies were further reinforced, and started for Peking with an army of 16,000 men. They met the Chinese army of 30,000 men at Pei-Tsang, and after a severe battle on August 5, drove them from their fortifications with great loss. The Chinese rallied at Yang-Tsun, but were again defeated by the allies on August 6. They offered no further serious resistance to the allies, who moved swiftly on Pekin, invested it, and, on August 14, breached its walls and entered it in triumph. The legations were relieved after an imprisonment of nearly three months. Two ministers, one of Japan, the other of Germany, had been murdered. The others had escaped death only by concentrating and defending themselves in the English compound. The allied forces occupied the city for a time, and then those of Russia and the United States withdrew, leaving a strong legation guard. The Chinese government appointed Li-Hung-Chang and Prince Ching ministers to meet ministers of the powers to arrange terms of settlement. After months of conference a protocol was signed in January, 1901, which was supposed to contain the germs of future settlement. But there was that in the Chinese situation which was bound to tax the diplomacy of the world during many years of the twentieth century.

A REVIEW OF MARTIAL RESULTS.—The history of the world shows that successful war adds to the glory and prestige of the victorious nation, and this is particularly exemplified by the wars of the nineteenth century. France, so long victorious, dazzled the world. At Waterloo, her glory was clouded. Napier, in his closing words of the history of these events of the twenty years of war and turmoil, showed how thoroughly the English people appreciated that their greatness and power were due to the glory achieved by the arms of Britain’s chivalrous sons.

While England was covering herself with glory, her offspring, the United States, was teaching her, in the war of 1812, that being now of age his pockets were not again to be turned inside out, a lesson which thereafter she heeded.

Greece, throbbing with the impulse of freedom, achieved her independence, displaying all the heroism of her Hellenic ancestry.

The Mexican war added greatly to the glory of American arms and resulted in the acquisition of a vast territory, whose inhabitants quickly assimilated themselves to the requirements of American citizenship.

The Revolution of ’48 but served to consolidate the power of Prussia, laying the foundation for the Imperial crown to rest upon the head of her king, while fitting France for her future solid republican career.

The Crimean war, except that it checked the policy of Russia, produced few results in comparison with the vast amount of blood and treasure so lavishly spent.

The victories of Magenta and Solferino illumined again the eagles of France. The “Seven Weeks’ War,” while still further consolidating Germany under Prussia, was not without its blessings for Austria, and advanced “Young Italy” greatly toward the goal of her ambition.

In America, the appeal to arms was made to decide the questions mooted since the nation’s birth. One effect of this war was to show the wonderful prowess and soldierly qualities of the American citizen.

The Franco-Prussian war lifted the dignity of Hohenzollern to its height, ended forever the Empire of France in a crushing fall, and taught the lesson of scientific preparation for war, than which no science is more worthy of intense study and application in all its branches.

The Chino-Japanese war was a triumph of a growing civilization over semi-barbarism, and foreshadows the prominent rôle that Japan may be called upon to play in the twentieth century. The enlargement of her territory was a fitting reward for her unselfish championing of her weaker sister, Korea.

The Greco-Cretan-Turkish war shed no glory on the Turkish nor on the so-called Christian nations, and will stand on history’s page as a crowning shame to European civilization.

The opening of Africa by General Kitchener and his great achievements read like old-time stories, and the twentieth century may see great results in Africa from this wonderful campaign.

The war of the United States with Spain, fought because it was impossible longer to allow the atrocities of her rule on this hemisphere at our very doors, has brought conditions not dreamed of, and which, under the providence of God, may lead to greater results in the development of Christian civilization than we now may comprehend.

The Boer war had little instigation on the part of Great Britain, except greed. Its management reflected no credit on her military genius, weakened her in the eyes of nations, and entailed a loss of life and money from which she will not recover in generations.

The Chinese disturbance did not rise to the dignity of war, but opened problems of startling intricacy and moment for all the powers.

THE CENTURY’S FAIRS AND EXPOSITIONS

BY GEORGE J. HAGAR,

_Editor of Appendix to Encyclopædia Britannica_.

Dr. Alfred Russell Wallace, in a recent work, argues that the nineteenth century is altogether unique in that it inaugurated a new era. To grasp its marvelous achievements, he tells us, it should be compared with a long historical period, rather than with another century, however happily selected. The progress it environs is set down as almost wholly material and intellectual, and the palm for completeness is given to the material. Debatable as his conclusion may be, there can be no dispute either as to the qualitative or quantitative progress in the material advancement of mankind in the century now closing. In the present retrospect the broader view becomes apparent,—that the material and the intellectual have been allied forces that have constantly pushed forward side by side, one devising in the solitude that genius needs for expansion, the other showing to the world the realizations of thought that in practical application benefit all.

The evolution of the international exposition of to-day is a conspicuous result of this material and intellectual wedlock. It seems a long time between the fair that was held to allow people not closely settled to purchase the ordinary commodities of life, food, clothing, and household belongings, and the great expositions to which the nations of the world bring the surpassing embodiments of native thought. Measured by years, the time is really beyond computation; but measured by results, mere time is annihilated, and the progress that the evolution illustrates is found to have kept a steady pace with man’s physical necessities and intellectual growth. The moment Necessity has shown that mankind needed something to make life brighter, happier, or more comfortable to pass through, Intellect has undertaken the task of creating it and has fashioned out the Material.

In the great expositions of to-day are seen the effects of the marvelous influence which sprang from the fair as a market, instituted so long ago that no call for the records is answerable. Of this kind, only a very few remain. Then came the fair designed to promote the useful arts and manufactures; the fair to advance agriculture and allied industries; and the fair to show special articles, to commemorate historical events, and to aid interests of large public concern. Under an ever-increasing expansion, stimulated by popular favor, the fair, with the commercial feature abandoned or having it only as a restricted branch, became the exhibition to show a larger development of the arts, sciences, and mechanical trades; to celebrate great public occurrences on a grander scale than earlier fairs had done; to promote special industries, local or national; to aid education by permanent displays of natural or manufactured products; and to promote the commercial intercourse of the world. From the first of this class of exhibitions came the international undertakings, first known as world’s fairs, and afterward as international exhibitions and expositions. In some one of these classes may be found every kind of a display of products, irrespective of its purpose or individual name.

The development of the modern exhibition from the early fair has been confined to no one country nor people. Everywhere the purpose and process have been the same. A few years changed the old-time mart, where people went to buy what they knew they would find, to the convenient place where tradesmen placed on view the things they knew people would need and buy, as well as articles offered at a venture that people who really didn’t need them might be tempted to purchase because of novelty or other quality. Thus, the bargain counter and the department store are several hundred years older than the thrifty housewife of to-day reckons.

Trade competition, then as now, led to a broadening of plans, rival efforts, and special attractions. People began to attend fairs to see what was new, as well as to buy; and soon, lest they should tire of sightseeing, it became necessary to provide means for entertaining them. Punch and Judy came on the scene with perennial popularity. Jugglery astounded the young and fascinated their elders. Dancing and wrestling rings proved sportive magnets of annually increasing strength. The fair now began to change from a strictly commercial undertaking to an occasion for holiday hilarity, and soon trade and amusement were struggling for the mastery. In many places, hilarity led to excesses, and excesses to crime. Public opinion demanded the forceful intervention of the law, and one by one the most demoralizing fairs were suppressed, the notorious Donnybrook closing its long career of debauchery and lighting in 1855.

The display of merchandise and the gathering of customers at the most noted fairs in time became really enormous, and for many years the great fairs of the day were held on open and extensive plains. Then, too, the fair assumed an importance that led first the local authorities, and after them higher dignitaries, to seek to turn it to their individual advantage. For a time no fair could be held in Great Britain without a special grant from the crown, and it was a widely observed custom for royal or ecclesiastical authorities to give permission to a town or village that had suffered some misfortune to hold a fair as a means of reestablishing itself. The famous fair of St. Giles’s Hill, near Manchester, England, was instituted as a revenue to the bishop by William the Conqueror. That it was a valuable monopoly is shown by the facts that its jurisdiction extended seven miles around the city, and that all merchants who sold wares within that circuit, unless at the fair, forfeited them to the bishop.

A curious evidence of early international interest in the fair, as well as of its importance and influence, is found in the records of 1314, when King Philip of France sent a formal complaint to King Edward II. of England, to the effect that the merchants of England had ceased frequenting the fairs in his dominions with their wood and other goods, to the great loss of his subjects. Philip entreated Edward to persuade, and, if necessary, to compel, English people to frequent the fairs of France as formerly, promising them all possible security and encouragement.

As a purely commercial institution, the fair had its best day when people were widely separated. The increase of population, the development of new life and activity by growing communities, the opening of means of travel between distant points, and the establishment of stores and markets, were all fatal to the commercial fair. To-day, in all Europe, only three really great annual fairs of this character remain,—those of Nijni-Novgorod, in Russia; Beaucaire, in France; and Leipsic, in Germany. The same conditions that brought the popular usefulness of the commercial fair to an end were the forces from which the fair as an exponent of industrial achievement has been developed, and the material progress of the nineteenth century is to be traced.

For the modern fair in all of its forms the world is indebted to the Society of Arts, of London, an organization whose fame in America was so great that Benjamin Franklin, in soliciting corresponding membership, declared that he would esteem it a great honor to be admitted and also to be permitted to contribute twenty guineas to be expended in premiums. What this Society in its early days did for Great Britain it did also for civilization. It organized the first exhibition of specimens of improvements in the useful arts and manufactures in 1760; stimulated native ingenuity by judicious awards of prizes and premiums for exhibits of exceptional merit; and extended its powerful influence to foster art, science, mechanical and agricultural industry, and the fishery trade and colonial commerce of the country.

Of the many influences of this Society that came to the United States, it may be questioned if any had a more lasting benefit for both people and country than that which gave birth to the mechanics’ institutes. There are people still living who are able to recall how the large cities in the Eastern and Middle States vied with each other in the establishment of two great and kindred institutions—the mechanics’ institute and the apprentices’ library. Philadelphia led the cities in the matter of time, her Franklin Institute being founded in 1824. Four years afterward the American Institute was chartered in New York City. After these came the Massachusetts Charitable Mechanics’ Association in Boston, the Maryland Institute in Baltimore, and numerous others,—those mentioned being the principal ones that still maintain annual or other exhibitions. At first, the exhibitions of these institutes, like the first one ever held under the patronage of a national government,—that in Paris in 1798,—were composed of various articles loaned by their owners. Soon, however, the popularity of the institutes and the awarding of prizes and diplomas brought to the exhibitions specimens of the handicraft of members and friends, and the rising lights in the arts and manufactures became eager to secure the recognition of their genius that such awards established. Thus, the influence of the principal surviving institutes has spread far beyond local limits.

Purely national exhibitions have never found much popular favor in the United States. When as a whole people we decide to hold one for a purpose of general interest, we prefer to set a large table and invite the universe to help us celebrate. In France, the first national exhibition was a loan exhibition. Its effect, however, was so immediate that the government repeated it the same year, organized more elaborate ones in 1801 and 1802, and decided to hold them triennially thereafter—a course that has since been interrupted by political exigencies. These exhibitions were projected to illustrate the progress of France only. In the United States there have been no State exhibitions, excepting agricultural fairs, for which outside coöperation has not been invited.

The life of the American agricultural fair is almost measurable by the full century. This, too, had its origin in England. The father of the American system of combined agricultural fairs and cattle shows was Elkanah Watson, a native of Plymouth, Mass., who spent the greater part of his life in promoting large public measures besides agriculture and education. In 1807 he removed from Albany, N. Y., to Pittsfield, Mass., where he engaged in general and experimental agriculture and cattle-raising. His efforts to improve local farming conditions and to raise a superior breed of cattle attracted widespread interest, and this suggested to him that an annual exhibition of cattle and of farm products, resulting from a more painstaking system of cultivation than was commonly followed, would prove of material advantage to the farmer, the breeder, and the general public. Accordingly, he induced his farming friends in the country to contribute specimens of improved breeds of cattle and of superior products of the soil; and the first exhibition or fair was held in 1810. This, with modest prizes for the best exhibits, proved a complete success.

(Illumination of Horticultural Building on Christmas Night.)]

Encouraged by the results of his initial efforts, he went to Boston to solicit pecuniary aid for a second and much larger exhibition. Although he was at that time widely known for his public-spirited philanthropy, and also as the founder of the influential Berkshire Agricultural Society, his appeals for aid brought him little save derision. To show how small concern was felt by business and public men toward the farming industry, a sentence in a letter from ex-President John Adams to Mr. Watson is sufficient:—

“You will get no aid from Boston; commerce, literature, theology,
medicine, the university, and universal politics are against you.”

The ex-President was correct in his judgment. Mr. Watson did not receive a single favorable response to his appeals; yet he lost not a particle of faith in the wisdom of his undertaking. With the coöperation only of the farmers in his county, Mr. Watson succeeded in arranging annual exhibitions until 1816, when he returned to Albany. The same year he organized the first agricultural society in the State of New York, and began establishing fairs and cattle shows in the near-by counties. In 1819 he secured the passage of an Act by the Legislature appropriating $10,000 annually for six years for the promotion of agriculture and domestic manufactures, conditional on a like amount being raised by the agricultural societies in the different counties. A State Society was incorporated in 1832, to which county societies were directed to report, while it, in turn, had to render a combined report to the Legislature annually.

Since then an agricultural department has become an indispensable part of the government of the various States and Territories, even of those that are popularly believed to be only metallic producers. The character of the state and county agricultural fair has been undergoing a radical change for many years, especially in sections thickly settled or near large cities, and the chief attractions have passed from the exhibition of sleek domestic animals and choice fruits of the soil to horse-racing and bicycle contests. Innovations foreign to the spirit and intention of the fair have already wrought its ruin in many places and are threatening it generally.

Of American fairs in the original commercial sense, those held during the Civil War, to aid the work of the United States Sanitary Commission on the battlefield and in the camp and hospital, will always be historically conspicuous. During those memorable four years it is doubtful if there was a single city, town, or village in the Northern States that did not put forth a special effort to provide necessities and conveniences for the soldiers and sailors that were not supplied by the government, and the fair was the most popular form of raising the needful money.

Exhibitions of special articles, possessing the features of state, national, and international combinations, and independent of any locality, event, or period of time, are growing in frequency. Many of these have a predominating technical interest,—as the international exhibitions of fisheries and fishery methods, of life-saving methods and apparatus, of forestry products and systems of forest preservation, and of railway appliances; while others combine the technical and popular features, as the exhibitions of electrical apparatus, of improved food preparations, of bicycles, of automobile vehicles, and of wood-working and labor-saving machinery.

Special exhibitions in the United States that possess a large popular interest include the annual showing of the art associations and leagues in the principal cities, and the annual horse, dog, and sportsmen’s shows in New York city. Among them also are to be noted the permanent expositions in Philadelphia and Chicago—both reminders of the greatest international expositions that had been held up to their day. The Philadelphia exposition is held in Memorial Hall, the building erected in Fairmount Park by the State of Pennsylvania at a cost of $1,500,000, and used for the Art Gallery of the Centennial Exposition in 1876. It now contains an art and industrial collection similar to the famous South Kensington Museum in London. The Chicago exposition is in the former Art Palace of the World’s Columbian Exposition in 1893, and, having been endowed by Marshall Field with $1,000,000, is now known as the Field Columbian Museum. Its most conspicuous feature is a collection showing the development of the railway, and the next, its forestry exhibits. In the line of permanent expositions, Philadelphia is to be credited with two commercial museums of far-reaching influence that will be considered further on.

The first exhibition of the industries of all nations was that held in Hyde Park, London, in 1851. It was an outgrowth of the annual exhibitions of the Society of Arts, before mentioned, and was at first designed to be only a national enterprise, but on a more extended scale than the former exhibitions of the Society. The late Prince Albert, husband of Queen Victoria, however, conceived the idea of throwing this particular exhibition open to the industry of the world. His suggestion at once met the favor of the Council of the Society, as well as of the leading manufacturers of England and the general public. A royal warrant was procured appointing a commission to “manage an exhibition of the works of industry of all nations,” and of this body Prince Albert became president.

On February 21, 1850, the commissioners felt justified in making a public announcement that the building would cover an area of from sixteen to twenty acres; that it would be ready for the reception of goods by January 1, 1851; and that the exhibition would be opened to the public on May 1, following. The plans for a building submitted by Sir Joseph Paxton were accepted after a large number had been considered. They called for a vast structure of iron and glass, somewhat similar to the great conservatory he had erected for the Duke of Devonshire at Chatsworth. A contract was signed with Messrs. Fox and Henderson for the construction of the building, under which they were to receive £79,800, and the materials of the building were to remain their property. On February 3, the completed structure was formally delivered to the commissioners. It had an extreme length of 1851 feet and an extreme breadth of 408 feet, with an additional projection on the north side, 936 feet long by 48 feet wide.

While the erection of the building was in progress, Dr. Lyon Playfair was chosen to decide and classify the wide range of articles that was sought to be brought together under the general title of “Objects of Industrial and Productive Art.” He arranged these under four great sections: Raw Materials, Machinery, Manufactures, and Fine Arts, and they in turn were divided and subdivided into a vast number of classes and smaller divisions. The collecting of national exhibits was placed in the hands of district committees in all the principal towns and manufacturing localities, and in response to invitations extended to all the British colonies and the various foreign governments, nearly every country in Europe, almost every State in the North American Union, the South American republics, India, Egypt, Persia, and the far-off islands of the seas, sent objects that swelled the total estimated value of exhibits—excluding the renowned Koh-i-noor diamond—to £1,781,929.

The exhibition was opened by Queen Victoria on the appointed day, and was continued till October 11. The total number of exhibitors was about 15,000. During the 114 days the exhibition was open a total of 6,063,986 persons visited it, a daily average of 42,111. The largest number in a single day was on Tuesday of the closing week, 109,915. An attempt to ascertain the number of foreign visitors developed the unexpected result that not much more than 40,000 foreigners visited London beyond the annual average of 15,000. The financial result of the exhibition was really remarkable. The total receipts from all sources amounted to £506,000, and the total expenditures to about £330,000, leaving a surplus of £176,000, which was subsequently increased to £186,436.

The distinctions of all kinds that were awarded, Council and prize medals and “honourable mentions,” aggregated 5084. It is here interesting to note, as showing the truly international character of the first world’s exhibition, that foreign guests occupied two-fifths of the exhibition space and received three-fifths of the honors. British exhibitors of machinery, manufactures in metal, and manufactures in glass and porcelain, took more prizes than all the foreigners combined. Foreigners led in the number of prizes for textile fabrics, fine arts, and miscellaneous manufactures; and in the section of raw materials for food and manufactures the foreign exhibitors gained nearly four times as many prizes as the British.

This exhibition developed a number of features that should be borne in mind when considering those that came after it. It was an experiment in an untried field; it was comprised in a single building; and it was self-supporting. In all respects it was a marvelous achievement. It made the late Prince Consort the “father,” and the Society of Arts the pioneer promoters, of the international exposition.

(World’s Columbian Exposition, Chicago, 1893.)]

The beneficial influence of the first world’s exhibition began to be felt immediately. An exhibition of the arts and manufactures of Ireland was held in Cork in the following year, and the Royal Dublin Society, which had been holding similar exhibitions triennially, got up a much larger one than usual, through the generous pecuniary aid of William Dargan, in 1853. The Dublin exhibition, unlike that of Cork, was international in scope.

American visitors to the London exhibition brought home with them a pretty large inspiration for a similar effort, and before the close of 1851 a number of citizens of New York had associated themselves for that purpose. In January, 1852, the corporation of the city of New York granted a lease for five years of Reservoir Square, on the conditions that a building of iron, glass, and wood should be erected thereon, and that the entrance fee to the proposed exhibition should not exceed fifty cents. In March, the Legislature incorporated the Association for the Exhibition of the Industries of all Nations, with a capital of $200,000 that might be increased to $300,000. Subsequently, the Federal Government constituted the building a bonded warehouse and exempted foreign exhibits from the payment of duties.

This exhibition was therefore a private enterprise, having no other official recognition than that mentioned. It was also an unfortunate affair from beginning to end. The location was then three or four miles from the heart of the city; the area was entirely inadequate for the purpose; the day of opening had to be postponed, because of the incomplete condition of the building; and financially the enterprise was a huge failure.

The exhibition was opened July 14, 1853, with much ceremony, although still scarcely half ready for exhibits or visitors, and was continued for 119 days. There were about 4800 exhibitors, somewhat more than one-half being foreign. The total cost of the exhibition was nearly $1,000,000, and the receipts were $340,000. Although a financial failure, and a disappointment in many ways, this first international exhibition in the United States was productive of much good.

The success of the London exhibition also aroused the French to depart from the exclusively national character of their former exhibitions and to inaugurate one open to the world. This was done under the direct auspices of the Imperial Government, which undertook to combine certain features of both the London and the New York enterprises; hence, the first international exhibition held in Paris was practically a private scheme supported by official guarantees. A further departure was here made in the matter of building, and, instead of the single great structure, there were the Palais de l’Industrie, the Palais des Beaux Arts, the Panorama, and three smaller buildings for agricultural implements, carriages, and a variety of less costly articles. Another innovation was here introduced, a partial return to the methods of the commercial fair, in the setting apart of exhibiting spaces on the open ground.

The main building, the Palais de l’Industrie, was erected by a joint-stock company on the Champs Elysées, and provided a floor space of 1,770,000 square feet. It was built of glass, stone, and brick, and was 800 feet long by 350 feet wide. The various buildings cost about $5,000,000, and the Palais de l’Industrie was erected for a permanent structure.

This exhibition was opened on May 15, 1855, and closed on November 15, following. It was visited by 4,533,464 persons. Besides France and her colonies, fifty-three foreign states and twenty-two colonies belonging to them sent exhibits. In all there were 20,839 exhibitors, those of France and her colonies predominating by only about 500. The exhibits were classified on the London plan, there being in each case thirty classes altogether. Excluding the main building, which the Imperial Government acquired, the exhibition cost about $2,250,000.

Between the first and second London exhibitions there were many industrial and art displays in the United Kingdom and colonies and on the Continent, among which should be noted those of New Brunswick and Madras in 1853, Munich in 1854, and Edinburgh and Manchester in 1857.

The second London exhibition was undertaken by a commission headed, as the first, by the Prince Consort, under a guarantee fund of $2,250,000. While it was in course of preparation the Prince Consort died, and for a while a heavy pall hung over the scheme. The commission here introduced the French idea of separate buildings. The site was at South Kensington, and the main structure was built of brick, glass, and iron, was nearly rectangular in shape, and covered an area of about seven acres. With the annexes the total area under roof was about twenty-three acres.

(World’s Columbian Exposition, 1893.)]

This exhibition was opened by the Duke of Cambridge on May 1, 1862, and remained open for 177 days. It was visited by 6,211,103 persons, a daily average of 36,329, its receipts were wholly absorbed by expenses, and a slight deficit was left. Foreign exhibitors numbered 17,861, and received more than 9000 prizes.

In 1863 the French Government announced that an exhibition would be held in Paris in 1867, that was intended to be more completely universal in character and more comprehensive in plan than any that had ever been held. The Champ de Mars, the great parade-ground on which the Ecole Militaire faced, containing about 111 acres, was placed at the disposal of the commissioners by the Government. In the centre of this space was erected the principal building, an oval structure mainly of iron, 1607 feet long and 1246 feet wide, that cost $2,357,000.

In planning this building the convenience of exhibitors and visitors in ready access to the exhibits of any desired country or class was given the preference over architectural effect. Here, again, was a diffusion of exhibits in detached buildings, and a noteworthy novelty was the reservation of ground on the park surrounding the main building for the erection by foreign exhibitors of special buildings for the display of articles that could not be accommodated in the main structure. This feature became the most popular one of the entire exhibition, for it gave a most graphic illustration of the architecture, manners, customs, and countless peculiarities of the peoples of the world.

The exhibition was opened by the Emperor on April 1, 1867, and was closed on October 31, following. The number of visitors was upward of 15,000,000, a daily average of nearly 70,000, and of exhibitors, 51,819. In all, 12,944 medals and grand prizes of honorable mention were awarded. From beginning to end the expenses were $4,596,764, and the receipts aggregated $2,822,000. The national and municipal governments contributed $1,200,000 each, which added to the receipts of the exhibition proper created a surplus over expenditure of $626,000.

London’s third exhibition, from May 1 till September 30, 1871, was projected as the first of an annual series that should separately promote a distinct branch of industrial effort. Thirty-three foreign countries were represented; there were approximately 4000 art and 7000 industrial exhibitors; and the visitors numbered 1,142,000. The second in the series, in 1872, was confined to printing, paper, music, musical instruments, jewelry, cotton goods, and fine arts; and the third, in 1873, was devoted to the general subject of cookery.

Great as was the universal exposition of Paris in 1867, that at Vienna in 1873 far surpassed it in extent and grandeur, although its pecuniary success was severely affected by an epidemic of cholera, a financial crisis, and local extortions. As each of the preceding international exhibitions had developed a distinctive feature, so this of Vienna introduced the custom of holding world’s congresses for the discussion of great problems of universal application.

The exhibition was opened on May 1 and closed on November 3, following. Turnstiles recorded the entrance of 7,254,687 visitors. There were about 70,000 exhibitors, whose display, in extent and costliness, exceeded that of Paris in 1867. The gross receipts were about $2,000,000, and expenditures about $9,850,000, making a deficiency of some $7,850,000, which the Government liquidated. The United States was represented by 643 exhibitors, more than half of whom were awarded prizes.

This brings the record up to the Centennial Exposition, at Philadelphia, in 1876, and covers the third quarter of the century. The actual work of making the Centennial Exhibition began on March 3, 1871, when Congress passed an Act creating the United States Centennial Commission. This authorized the President to appoint a commissioner and an alternate from each State and Territory, on the nomination of the respective governors. The appointments were promptly made, and from the whole body of commissioners the following were chosen for the principal executive officers: President, Joseph R. Hawley, of Connecticut; Vice-Presidents, Alfred T. Goshorn, of Ohio, Orestes Cleveland, of New Jersey, John D. Creigh, of California, Robert Lowry, of Iowa, and Robert Mallory, of Kentucky; Director-General, Alfred T. Goshorn; Secretary, John L. Campbell, of Indiana; Assistant Secretary, Dorsey Gardner; Counselor and Solicitor, John L. Shoemaker.

Details of organization and management were vested in an Executive Committee. On June 1, 1872, Congress passed an Act creating the Centennial Board of Finance, with large powers. This Board estimated that the cost of the exhibition would be $10,000,000, and apportioned shares of capital stock for this amount among the several States and Territories, on the basis of population. Subsequently, a Board of Revenue was appointed and vested with authority to collect subscriptions and other funds.

Despite the financial panic of the summer of 1873, preparations progressed so favorably that on July 3 President Grant issued a proclamation reciting that the one-hundredth anniversary of the independence of the United States would be celebrated by holding an international exhibition of arts, manufactures, and the products of the soil and mine, in Philadelphia, in 1876, opening April 19 and closing October 19, and inviting the nations of the world to take part in both the celebration and the exhibition. In response to a formal invitation issued by the Secretary of State, thirty-two foreign governments sent favorable replies for themselves and their colonies.

(Atlanta Exposition, 1895.)]

The city of Philadelphia placed at the disposal of the commissioners a tract in Fairmount Park, aggregating 236 acres, for the principal buildings, and also made proportionately large allotments for the exhibition of livestock and agricultural implements.

Five principal buildings were erected. The Main Exhibition Building was in the form of a parallelogram, 1880 feet long and 464 feet wide, with projections at the centre of the longest sides 416 feet long, and at the centre of the short ones 216 feet long. The building was erected on piers of masonry, wrought-iron columns supporting wrought-iron roof trusses forming the superstructure, the sides of which for some distance above the ground were finished between the columns with paneled brick work. This building covered 21.47 acres, had a floor space of 936,008 square feet, and cost $1,600,000.

The Art Gallery and Memorial Hall, designed to be a permanent structure, was erected on an eminence in the Lansdowne Plateau. It is built of granite, glass, and iron, in the modern Renaissance style of architecture, on a terrace several feet above the level of the Plateau, and cost $1,500,000. The dimensions are: length, 365 feet; width, 210 feet; height, 59 feet. From the centre of the structure rises a dome of iron and glass, 150 feet in height, surmounted by a figure of Columbia with outstretched hands. This building was erected by the State of Pennsylvania, and is now used as a permanent art and industrial museum.