The Sun.
London, England, 1862-03-24 00:00:00

COMPETITIVE EXAMINATIONS.

The utility of Competitive Examinations has now
been so generally recognised that comparatively
little interest attaches to statistics on the subject.
We are unwilling, however, to allow the Seventh
Report of the Civil Service Commissioners to pass
without notice, inasmuch as it furnishes incidental
information on one or two points which were
brought prominently forward at earlier periods of
the controversy. Perhaps at this time of day it
would be unnecessary to do more than recite the
objections which were once urged against the
scheme, of filling public appointments, not by favour,
but according to the merits of the candidates.
Some refuted themselves, others were obviously as
applicable to the old system as to the new one, while
those which appeared to carry greater weight have
since been pretty well disposed of. We were told
that these prizemen would be so conceited with
their success as to be insubordinate and impractica-
ble, though it was obvious that, if this argument was
valid in the case of the Civil Service, it was valid in
all cases. Promotion for merit's sake should be
eschewed, not only in Government offices, but in all
other departments and professions, and advancement
should be confined exclusively to the undeserving,
who, being conscious of their unworthiness and
want of claims, might be grateful for favour and
obedient accordingly. It was said, again, that no
managers of a private establishment would put the
places of their clerks up to competition, though it
ought to have been remembered that in a private
establishment self-interest supplied motives for
vigilance and inquiry which were lacking in public
departments. We were further told that the quali-
ties most desirable in a candidate did not admit of
certification ; but, if that was the truth, the patron
was just as helpless as the
tineorequired,
n n
iegrexaminer,gehoutr arbaleendgda: ando
plausibleputherernodfimse
proficient
objec-
tions, e was,nhlcttt
atiwtni
oa
nasals
alleged
heoregwaebtederv,
ate
nhr nothinghowever,
g
branches
wereco af takenlost.nldeidr
u
l
yet be impeachable in respect of character. A
clever but dissolute man, for whose integrity no
one would vouch, might be thrust into the public
service, to the great detriment of the State ; or
a weak and sickly youth, exhausted by excessive
study and precocious development, might be
charged with duties for which he was practically
unfit. Of course, it was easy to reply that these
objections also were applicable to both systems
alike, and that a patron was as likely to over-
look disqualifications as an Examiner, and, in-
deed, more so, since his decision was notoriously
based upon favour. In some way or other, how-
ever, it was believed or pretended that Examiners
either would not or could not take cognisance
of these collateral qualifications, and that whereas
a patron would be able to survey the whole case, an
examiner would confine himself to book learning
only. We need only turn to the report before us to
see the fallacy of these assumptions. To what ex-
tent the test is applied in the case of competition
for particular situations we are not informed, but
that health and character can be inquired into, and
that this inquisition has been effectually made is
clear from some brief statistics given concerning
non-competitive examinations for certificates only.

Of the whole number of applicants for these
diplomas since 1855, upwards of 10,000 received
certificates, while nearly 3,000 (2,733) failed to
obtain them. Bat of these 2,733 rejections, it ap-
pears that 287—that is more than 10 per cent.—
were based on defects of health or character. The
Commissioners even add some remarks upon the
subject. " The task, they say, " of inquiring into
the character of candidates is by no means an easy
one, and cannot be satisiactorily performed with-
out the most confidential intercourse between those
on whom the duty of deciding is imposed." There
is no doubt of this ; but would the task have been
any easier when it was performed by a patron ?
Most readers know the difficulty attending all
inquiries into character. It seems so hard to stand
in the way of any candidate for employment that
testimonials are seldom refused, and bad characters
rarely given. We should infer, indeed, from the
words of the Commissioners, that they have been
rather successful than otherwise in obtaining
, this kind of evidence, since they seem
1 desirous of defending themselves against
the charge of severity. " Although," they
say, "it is our anxious desire to do justice to the
candidate, we feel that the State has a right to the
service of persons to whom no reasonable suspicion
11 attaches, and that the Order in Council which re-
' quires proof, satisfactory to us, of the good charac-
ter of the candidate, rests upon the soundest princi-
ple." We need not add our assent to these proposi-.
tions, but it is perfectly plain that what can be done
with one class of candidates can be done with all,
and that if the State can thus gain the services not
only of well-educated men, but of men to whom
" no reasonable suspicion attaches," the competitive
system must be answering its purpose at every
point.
Another well-known objection to these examina-
tions was based upon the details of the examinations
themselves. Certain critics took the questions
proposed, applied them to the actual duties of the
situations competed for, and turned the scheme
into ridicule by contrasting the qualifications ex-
pected with the every-day work of the office. The
simple truth was that, if there was any fault at all
in this point, it rested, not with the system of ex-
amination, but with our system of education. A
test of knowledge can only be applied with reference
to presumed instruction. What examinations test is
proficiency—that is to say, attainment of knowledge
deliberately sought. The best scholar is he who
has made the greatest progress in the studies of the
school, and it is in these studies only that his pro-
gress can be tried. If the examiners did anything
absurd in asking a candidate for a clerkship to
answer questions in history and geography, the
absurdity was commenced in the schools where his-
tory and geography were taught. If these studies
are utterly useless in the work of every-day life, they
should never have been pursued. The Examiners,
in short, simply took the ordinary branches of learn-
ing as taught in schools, and inquired into the
progress which the candidates had severally made.
It was a perfectly reasonable conclusion that the
lad who by his intellect or his industry had done
beat at school would do best afterwards, and that
if he possessed the greatest amount of the infor-
mation usually communicated, he possessed the
greatest amount of the knowledge generally found
useful. The Commissioners, however, distinctly
show in their last report that their attention is
fixed upon the special qualifications which par-
ticular offices may require, and we select the ex-
ample of the Indian Civil Service as one of the most
also
impoetant.
The system of Competitive Examinations was

established in this service seven years ago. In the
second year of its operation 56 candidates were
examined for 20 appointments, in' 1861 the ap-
pciatments bad risen to CO, and the candidates
to 17i. One of the qualifications most desirable
in competitors was a knowledge of Sanskrit, but
that qualification at first was very rare. Out of
an aggregate of 295 candidates examined in the
first four years of the system, only six so much
as professed any acquaintance with the language
in question. Last year, however, as many as 36,
out of the 171, offered themselves for examination
in this subject; and the Commissioners record with
satisfaction this marked improvement in special
preparation. But there is another point of inte-
rest which should be mentioned. The successful
candidates for these particular appointments are
required, after approval, to devote a year to special
studies connected with their future duties, and then
to present themselves to the Examiners again.
Now, so strictly is this supplementary examination
conducted that last year a considerable percentage
of those who had passed the first ordeal failed in the
second, and were refused certificates. The Exami-
ners profess their due appreciation of general in-
struction, but they insist upon preparation for
official duty as a sine qua non. We notice this
fact for the warning and advantage of all con-
cerned, but it shows clearly enough that the Com-
petitive System can secure special qualifications as
easily as general ability.—Times.

LA TV INTELLIGENCZ-2larch, 22.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.

(Before Sir C. Cresswell and a Common Jury.)

WALL V. WALL AND WYATT.
This was a suit instituted by the husband for a
divorce on the ground of his wife's adultery with
the co-respondent, a solicitor, to which the respon-
dent pleaded, denying the adultery, recriminated
the charge, and also alleged cruelty on the part of
her husband. The co-respondent did not appear.
Dr. Spinks, Mr. Joyce, and Mr. Serle were coun-
sel for the petitioner; and Dr. Phillimore, Q.C.,
represented the respondent.
From the statement of counsel it appeared that
the petitioner was the son of a clergyman of the
Church of England, and that the respondent was
in an inferior station of life. The parties became
acquainted while the petitioner was " walking the
hospital," and were married in London in June,
1857, the petitioner at the time being under age.
They cohabited in lodgings in University-street
until November, 1856, when they separated in con-
sequence of the misconduct of the wife. The peti-
tioner allowed the respondent £2 a week until the
commencement of the present proceedings, and the
Court had awarded the same amount pendente lite.
She was frequently visited at Bow by the co-
respondent, who ultimately took up his residence
in the same house.
These facts were deposed to in evidence.
Dr. Phillimore said that after the testimony of
the witnesses called le could not deny the adultery
charged against his client, but he should be able to
establish a case of adultery against the petitioner,
who had been seen to go home with a woman whom
he met at a casino in Oxford-street.
Mrs. Lofts, who said that she was a dressmaker,
was examined, and said that she had been employed
by Mrs. Wall to make her wedding dress, but this
was not until after the marriage had been solemnised.
(Laughter.) She had been asked by Mrs. Wall to
look after her husband, and she had seen him dancing
with some ladies at a casino. She witnessed no im-
propriety on his part, and she did not see him leave
the casino in company with any
.female.
Dr. Phillimore said he was instructed that the
witness would be able to carry the case much fur-
ther, and under the circumstances he would leave
it in the hands of the Court.
The jury immediately found a verdict for the
petitioner, and the Court made a decree nisi, with
costs against the co-respondent.

MONDAY EVXMNG, MAIICH 24, 1802.,-