The objection, that the mode of making all appointments by open competitive examination, will deprive the President, and members of Congress of the opportunity of appointing the sons of meritorious officers, or poor, and it may be, orphan boys of genius—is more plausible than real. That such appointments have been made, to the manifest advantage of the country, is certain. But we know not a single instance of such marked success, on the part of a cadet thus appointed, as to attract investigation, where the same youth would not have secured the appointment in open competition. But if he had failed, and the place had been filled by one better qualified, the country would have been no loser, and he would have suffered no injustice or neglect. We fear, from an abuse of this amiable motive of rewarding meritorious parents, and assisting the poor, that in some instances, weak, ignorant, and incompetent persons are appointed, as though this Academy were a public charity school, or home for orphans; and not a special school for military instruction and training, for which the great object, in any mode of appointment, is to select those who will profit most by its advantages, and do the country the greatest service after being thus educated at its expense.
To the objections that, in these examinations, “the most forward boys will have the best chance, and such boys seldom make the best men,” and that no amount of book knowledge can give assurance of the great military genius, “which must be born and not made,” we reply, that these objections apply just as forcibly to any plan of nomination, and to every system of instruction. But we believe that those examinations can be and will be so conducted as to distinguish what is precocious from what is the healthy development of the faculties, what is solid from what is showy in attainments, what is vigor, grasp and aptitude of mind from what is mere memory and quickness, in competing candidates. All of these candidates must bring the testimonials of their former teachers, as to their character, ability and attainments, must have reached the age of eighteen years, and will be called upon to exhibit orally as well as in writing their knowledge and opinions on subjects which require judgment, reflection, presence of mind and decision. If a young man of eighteen and upward shows that he has done well what he had undertaken to do thus far in life, that he has preserved a sound constitution in vigorous health, has mastered the studies appropriate to his age, is honest, diligent, thoughtful, teachable, courageous, courteous, and ambitious of excellence generally, then the country has every assurance which can be given that on this basis of character, talents, attainments, and application, a solid fabric of military education can be reared, and that in the hour of trial he will show not only courage to dare, but competence to devise, influence and command. In the responsibilities of such an hour will be found the fruitage of all his previous promise and preparation.
To the objection—“that a competitive examination must always result in the success of the best instructed, wholly irrespective of the capacity of the competing candidates; and the plan will thus secure for the country the services of dull mediocrity well instructed, and exclude genius without opportunities of development,”—we reply, that this does occur now under the present system, but need not, and never has been the result of competitive examination properly conducted. The examination which we propose to have inaugurated, is not to search simply or mainly for the results of memory or diligence, but for “vigor and aptitude of mind” in reference to the special purposes of this Academy. The examination will be poorly conducted, and will operate here widely differently than elsewhere, if it does not only exclude in advance palpable incompetency, and ascertain beyond doubt the possession by all the successful candidates, of that knowledge which is the basis of a special military training, but also seek, and give credit in the result, for the quick eye, the firm set mouth, the vigor and elasticity of body, the rapid decision, the contempt of danger, the competency to influence and command—and all the other marks of the incipient soldier and officer, as well as the mathematical tastes and qualities of mind which indicate the successful engineer. Composed as every Examination Commission might be, of at least one experienced officer of the United States Army, of one member (past or present,) of the Academic Board, of one officer of the State Militia, as well as one or more experts in educational matters, the military qualities of body, character and mind, will be sought for as well as the mere results of memory, diligence and good opportunities of instruction, in the competing candidates.
To the objection, that candidates will make special preparation, and in the phraseology of the class-room, “cram for the occasion,” we reply,—to such preparation and cramming as cover the whole ground of a good English education, we can see no possible objection; the more of it, the better. If the preparation is only crude and on the surface, we are sure that the ploughshare of interrogation requiring precise answers, oral and written, will very soon expose its superficial and undigested character.
To the sifting out and selection by open competition, might be added a period of probation for the successful candidates—making their first year’s connection with the academy a further test of capacity, preparation, and aptitude for a military career. No pains and no expense should be spared to exclude from the academy and the service, incompetent, indifferent, and unteachable cadets and officers; such men are “cumberers of the ground,” and no influence and inertia should be potent enough to resist the inevitable working of the principle of open competition, applied at frequent intervals, and at every stage of promotion, in getting rid of such cadets and officers.
The fact that such a public examination is to be held from year to year, and that the educational privileges of this Academy, and immediate and prospective promotion in the army are the prizes which await success, will, in five years call forth more latent genius in the obscure corners and poor families of a State, than has ever been sought out by the lantern of patronage, (which is now seldom carried beyond the family, or neighborhood, or party of the person having the nomination,) since the foundation of the Academy. With the network of public and elementary schools, woven by state legislation over all the land—with public schools of a higher grade, and special schools of science and the arts already established, at short intervals, or which will be called into existence by the demand for a higher and different preparation from that now given, it may be safely said, that no genius, likely to attract the attention of a member of Congress, will exist, which will not be developed under the same influences by which the “dull mediocrity” of the rest of the community will be educated. Once set in the path of instruction and development, real genius will assert its own claims to attention, and will, on a first or second trial, before any board of examiners, make its vigor, courage, and persistence felt. The result will be the same in this institution, as in every really good Public High School and Free Academy—all classes as to wealth, occupation, religious and political affinities will be represented,—provided the regulations are judicious, and the examination practical and impartial.
This is the experience of the competitive principle in France ever since it was inaugurated by Carnot in the Polytechnic School at Paris, and Napoleon extended its application to every public special school, and to promotion in every department of administration, civil as well as military. And where is there more general administrative ability, central and local? Where are abler or better trained officers, military and civil, to be found? Where does “well instructed mediocrity,” no matter how well backed up by wealth, find less favor, or genius for organization and command, no matter how poor or unfriended, find such speedy and sure recognition?
The experience of England in the trial of the two principles of patronage and competitive examination for admission, not only to the military and naval schools, but to the East India and the Civil service generally, is instructive, and especially on the points which we are now considering. Prior to the Crimean war, (which exposed the utter incompetency of a large number of officers, who had obtained their military education and promotion by patronage and purchase,)—admission to the Royal Military Academy at Woolwich, was by nomination, and the age fixed by law, was fourteen years.