Evening capital and Maryland gazette. (Annapolis, Md.) 1910-1922, 1913-09-05
WHY HE ''FLUNKED"
THE EFFICIENCY TEST"
Secretary Of Navy Daniels Has
Thrown it and Aptitude Out
Of Window.
PERSONNEL OF THE FLUNKERS'
NavY's Chief Makes Lengthy State
mens and Speaks His Mind.

Secretary Of the Navy Daniels has
appeared before the Naval Commit
tee Of the Senate to explain his rea-
sons for "llunking' four applicants
for commissions in the Marine Corps
after they had been favorsbly report
ed by the examining board and giving
their places 70 three young men who
had failed to pass the examinations.
Secretary Daniels told TIE com
mittee that the examining board had
placed altogether too much stress on
the matter OF aptitude and probable
efficiency and bad raised low marks
recciyedla the physical and mental
examinations on the records of msny
OF the candidates solely on their pros
pectiye efficiency as naval officers
Several instances Of this were re-
cited, and while no report was given
out following the meeting, IL is un-
derstood that the committee viii up
hold Secretary Daniels
The men who are said to have been
"hunked" are: A. b. Kingston,
Buffalo, N. y; 1. H. Miller, Lexing-
ton, Mo. Samuel Howard. Washing
ton, and Ethelbert Talbot, Bethlehem,
Pa. The three men whom il was as
serted Secretary Daniels favored
were L. M. Bourne and A. II. Tour
mage, of N birth Caro- lima, and Louis
E. Pagan, of Philadelphia. Ia a state
ment Secretary Daniels said
- became primarily interested
when on reading the report of the
board found that it had placed a
man by the name Of Foster as eight
on the list and had given him mark
Of 49. Foster was an enlisted man
who had worked his way up and had
prepared himself to take the exami-
nations for a commission.
inquired of the board upon what
basis the marking of Foster was
made, and learned that 1t had marked
him down on aptitude and probable
efficiency. | told the hoard that this
would never do, that Foster had
served in the ranks with credit and
had risen above his fellows in ear
nest attention TO his duties and in
ambition. Obviously, / contended
that he had demonstrated aptitude
and efficiency as absolutely as it
could be demonstrated, namely, by
his record. Moreover. rejecting his
mark on this subject. found that on
his written examination the young
man stood second on the list.
Coming then to the cases Of the
three young men who failed Fat the
Naval Academy found that they had
bilgeG, as you call it, on some one
subject, like arithmetic. | took the
position that, as they had stood fair
ly well in other subjects at the
Academy, as candidates for commits
sions in the Marine Corps they were
probably better equipped than grad
uate Of some school who had never
drilled in his life aud knew nothing
OF naval training.
II Inasmuch, then, as they had passed
written examination, but had been
marked down on aptitude and prob
able efficiency, simply because they
had bilged' from the Academy, the
marking was not fair.
II agreed with the board that il
would probably be better not to adj
miN men to commissions in the Ma
rine Corps who had failed at the
Academy, but that, contend, is
stand that should be taken before
men are permitted tc take the exam
nations. II is not fair. however,
after accepting their applications to
funk them solely on shis ground.
In other words, have thrown out
the back window the test of aptitude
and probable efficiency. f"