"The awards as made by the superior jury are final and binding upon the Exposition Company and the National Commission, except as to any award or awards which are impeached by said company or Commission for fraudulent conduct on the part of said jury in making the awards." Second. Omit entirely the third clause. We are of the opinion that ample provision is made in the rules and regulations for having any fraud or fraudulent conduct on the part of any subordinate jury or juror fully considered and determined by appeal to the superior jury, and that no further precaution or provision is needed unless the conduct of the superior jury is shown to have been fraudulent. Our purpose in striking out the third clause is that a charge of fraud against the superior jury should be made only when supported with the character and dignity pertaining to the Exposition Company or the National Commission, and that the provision made in the third clause for affidavits is wholly unnecessary because the charge would not be made by either of those bodies except upon such evidence as they would be satisfied warranted making the charge. Yours, very truly, CHAS. W. KNAPP, _Member Board of Arbitration_. Hon. JOHN M. THURSTON, _Member Arbitration Board, National Commission._ On November 12, 1904, the Commission addressed the following communication to the President of the Exposition Company, forbidding the use of the signature of the president of the Commission to any certificate of award until the matter at issue was determined. NOVEMBER 12, 1904. SIR: Your letter of November 8 received and contents noted. The statements contained therein as to what occurred in your office on the 19th of October in your interview with Mr. Betts, Mr. Miller, and the writer do not accord with the distinct recollection or understanding of any of the three parties mentioned. I am glad to know that our communications will hereafter be in writing, that these misunderstandings may be avoided. The National Commission is in entire accord with this position, and we will try and observe our part of this understanding. The informal conferences between the members of the National Commission and representatives of your company seem to have resulted in no definite understanding, and the Commission therefore insists that arbitration be had to determine the true effect and meaning of section 6 of the act of Congress approved March 3, 1901, as affecting the rights and duties of the National Commission to approve or not approve the awards. In the meantime and until this question is determined the Commission can not authorize the use of its president's signature on any certificate of award.