of their facilities of transport, were the most dilatory. The United
States held back until her guests were served, confident in the abundant
efficiency of the preparations made for bringing the entertainers to
their side. Better thus than that foreigners should have been behind
time.

When the gates of the enclosure were at last shut upon the steam-horse,
a broader and more congenial field of duty opened before him. From the
rôle of dray-horse he passed to that of courser. Marvels from the ends
of the earth he had, with many a pant and heave, forward pull and
backward push, brought together and dumped in their allotted places. Now
it became his task to bear the fiery cross over hill and dale and
gather the clans, men, women and children. The London exhibition of
1851 had 6,170,000 visitors, and that of 1862 had 6,211,103. Paris in
1855 had 4,533,464, and in 1867, 10,200,000. Vienna's exhibition drew
7,254,867. The attendance at London on either occasion was barely double
the number of her population. So it was with Paris at her first display,
though she did much better subsequently. Vienna's was the greatest
success of all, according to this test. The least of all, if we may take
it into the list, was that of New York in 1853. Her people numbered
about the same with the visitors to her Crystal Palace--600,000.
Philadelphia's calculations went far beyond any of these figures, and
she laid her plans accordingly.

Some trainbands from Northern and Southern cities might give their
patriotic furor the bizarre form of a march across country, but the
millions, if they came at all, must come by rail, and the problem was to
multiply the facilities far beyond any previous experience, while
reconciling the maximum of safety, comfort and speed with a reduction of
fares. The arrangements are still to be tested, and are no doubt open to