Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1905-01-12

lRE BR Nl5 CHARGES
IN ho Have Been Rejected BY the
a0apd and Have Failed to Receive
Passing Marks In Examination Flo
compIalnts-Board Now In Session.

es D6S MONIES, Jan. .ll.--lfOY0TQOr Cun.
Minis has fixed Friday. January 13, for
a hearing relative to charges against
the state board Of mining examiners
which often meets at Ottumwa.
These charges involve the compc.
tency Of the board and the accuracy
of it's examinations of candidates for
appointment as mine engineers. 1t 10
understood by the Loard that they are
supported by defeated or rejected can.
didates. including Thomas Isaacs Of
Htteman, William Abrams OF Oska.
loosa and R. d. Owens Of Beacon. II
also Is said that j. T. Beard Of Scran.
ton, Pa, h-ss encouraged the attack on
the examining board and may come to !:
the hearing Friday. Whether D.. G.. !.
Phillips Of Hiteman, formerly one lof
the board and who Is said to ,sympa-
thize with .le attack on It's members,
will attend the hearing is not known.
The examining board met in Des
Moines yesterday It's members were
seen at the Elliott hotel last evening
and expressed their qualification that
at last the charges which have been
set afloat relative to their examinA.
tions may have investigation by the
governor. They are confident OF the
outcome. They welcome, the investi.
cation and have no fear Of the result.
They will not be represented in the
hearing by attorneys.
There were present at the meeting
all of the members of the .examing
4 board: III. Booth Of Knoxville, Ed. Gray
of Des Moines, John Caldwell of Sey.
mour, John Owens of Beacon, and Joe
4 Baker Of Des Moines.
A The markings Of the papers in the
last examination are under fire. The
Examination consisted OF forty ques-
tions, enty-fve requiring writterp an.
| swers and fifteen oral The board now
has no record OF the markings, these
being in the possession Of the former
|asecretary, Mr.. Phillips. But 1t has the
i original papers.
4 Marks Grow Lower.
Il Last night the board went through
these papers again, comparing them
and the answers given with the solu-
tions which Mr.. Beard, who has
brought the controversy to a focus.
published in Mines and Minerals In
November The Beard answers re-
suited in different markings for, the
candidates than those given by the
board and this is the basis of the at.
i tack before the board. Mr.. Baker ia
!, new member of the board, not hav.
ing been in the examination whose re.
suits have been complained Of. He
Z was given the task last evening OF
: marking the papers anew.
1 Not having the markings Of the an
r swers to the fifteen oral questions the
candidates were given 80 per cent
while the members OF the board testif,
that the markings did not exceed 81
odd. With this as basis the writer
! papers resulted on most liberia
markings by Mr.. Baker at less pei
s cents for the candidates than were
f given them ty the board originally.
j, The complainants object to the habi
: Of the board in giving candidates lest
J. than perfect when the answer was no
i, in correct terms. For instance an an
b swer to question asking for result
in tons given in pounds was no
marked perfect; nor was mistake Ii
writing an answer worked by q, cor
rect method overlooked. Mr.. Bake
s however, gave more liberal treatmen
Of this class Of answers than did th,
:, board originally.