Jasper County Democrat, Volume 13, Number 63, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 16 November 1910 — SOLID SOUTH IS WAVERING [ARTICLE]

SOLID SOUTH IS WAVERING

New Orleans Opposed as Panama Exposition City. TEXAS FAVORS SAN FRANCISCO Decided Falling Off In Enthusiasts In Lone Star State as Evidenced by Articles Appearing In Papers of El Paso an l San Antonio—Swing In Line Fcr California City as t.;e Lcg'Cal Site. While New Orleans is industriouay elahn.rg the endorsement of the MHsLr.in i valley region and the niddl > wcat it is allowing the “solid ;outii” ta v.a\ r in 1{,3 supposed allegiance ar d s'.ip away. . A. few days ago word came from San Antonio, Tex., that there was a decided falling off of Xew Orleans exposition enthusiasts in that city owing to the greed of the Crescent City in attempting to secure the National Bankers’ convention for next year, after San Antonio had put in a bid for their entertainment. Such action was not considered neighborly, especially after the Texas city had been asked to support New Orleans In its struggle for exposition honors. Now El Paso, Tex., has apparently swung into line for San Francisco as against New Orleans as the logical site for the Panama exposition, judging by the following in the El Paso Herald of Oct. 12: “El Paso's Interest as to- the location of the Panama exposition of 1915 all lies with San Francisco as against New Orleans. A 8 one commentator says: ‘There never was an exposition so successful as that at Seattle, and there never was one so forlorn a failure as that at Jamestown, Va., notwithstanding the fact that half the population of the country is within a day’s or a night’s ride of Jamestown.’- An exposition at San Francisco will promote the development of the west and that Is what we are after.”

Sometime ago New Orleans secured an endorsement in St. Louis and that success appears to have induced the belief among ithe Crescent City boosters that the entire middle west was only waiting for an Invitation to climb on the New Orleans band wagon. Next New Orleans announced that Omaha wad for it, but the announcement was premature. In its hurry to report- result the New Orleans bureau at Omaha sent broadcast over*

tne country that New Orleans had been endorsed as the exposition city by the Commercial club, the largest and most influential organization of business men there. Immediately the Commercial club held a meeting, repudiated the alleged endorsement of New Orleans and endorsed San Francisco by an overwhelming vote. The city council of Omaha, by unanimous vote, passed .a resolution also endorsing San Francisco. Still asserting title to the sympathy and influence of the entire middle west section, the New Orleans boosters descended upon Chicago and requested an endorsement. The request was politely but firmly refused, but New Orleans, nothing daunted, continued to “claim” Chicago's support, confident in the belief that the endorsement would come later. But on Oct. 7 Chicago showed unmistakably where she stood in the exposition fight when the National Business League of America adopted a resolution. which after setting forth the advantages of San Francisco, concluded. “That San Francisco be. and hereby is, strongly recommended as the prorer site for the proposed exposition." ■ "■: ' New Orleans suffered another rebuff when she sought the endorsement of Washington, D. C. Washington refused, whereupon the New Orleans promoters dismissed the subject with the remark that Washington did not count anyway. New Orleans “hopes” to raise about |8,000,000 for her proposed exposition, which will be entirely inadequate for so great an undertaking, tut Senator Foster of Louisiana seeks to minimize the importance of having sufficient funds to insure the success of the enterprise. Admitting that San Francisco will have more than twice as much money for exposition purposes as New Orleans, he pleads that “it woqld be mean and unfair for congress to take that fact into consideration.”