The most intricate designs were executed in a manner betokening the true artist, and none but those educated in the art of combining colors and in designing could have obtained the results seen at St. Louis.

The tendency in all garments for women, however, was toward the ornate rather than the simple, and with but few exceptions every gown, every wrap, and all the lingerie was most elaborate.  But the hand of the true artist was shown in these garments in that they were beautiful and in good taste in spite of their elaborateness.

It would have been advantageous if the women’s work had been arranged separate from the men’s, because they would have attracted more attention as a woman’s exhibit per se and would therefore have called greater attention to the progress women have made in these lines.  In other words, the separate exhibit would have served better for a comparative study of woman’s advancement in the past ten years.

There was a greater variety of woman’s work than was shown at the Chicago Exposition, and that in itself showed an advancement.  The greater scope gave evidence of a broadening influence, and the women showed themselves proficient in all they undertook.

    As compared with the work of men, I should say that the women’s
    exhibit had every right to be placed side by side with the
    men’s, just as was done.

In Group 58 was eventually placed the wonderful piece of embroidery of the “Sistine Madonna,” the work of Miss Ripberger, of Berlin.  The linen upon which the life-like figures were wrought was probably 6 by 8 feet in size, and in order to reproduce the colors the silk had been matched with the colors in the original painting.  The reproduction of Raphael’s wonderful work was a marvel of artistic ability and patience, and was exquisitely executed.  It justly deserved the grand prix accorded it.

Department H, agriculture, Mr. Frederic W. Taylor, chief, comprised 27 groups and 137 classes, the board of lady managers being represented in but five groups.

Group 78, Mrs. W.H.  Felton, of Cartersville, Ga., Juror.

Under the heading of “Farm equipment—­Methods of improving lands,” the three classes into which it was divided represented:  Specimens of various systems of farming.  Plans and models of farm buildings; general arrangement; stables, sheepfolds, barns, pigsties, breeding grounds; special arrangements for breeding and fattening cattle; granaries and silos; furniture for stables, barns, kennels, etc.  Material and appliances used in agricultural engineering, reclaiming of marshes, drainage, irrigation.

Mrs. Felton says, in a letter accompanying her report: 

In accordance with your official request, I have prepared a short resume of the work as juror in Group Jury No. 78.  It was the central group—­I mean, the leading group in the Department of Agriculture.  There were no exhibits by women, because we passed upon matters so immense that it was the work of States and foreign governments, rather than of individuals, that was noted.

Mrs. Felton’s report is as follows: