' As for the unanimous testimony of the Board of
Visitors, I can only say that I know not on what ground
such testimony is based, for, as I said before, the
members of that board were not in the library when I
was examined in philosophy; but perhaps, this is only
one of the 'they says' of the officers. There are some
things in this case which are not so manifest as my
alleged incompetency, and I would like to bring them to
the attention of the Chronicle, and of any others who
may feel interested in the matter. There has always been
a system of re-examinations at the Military Academy for
the purpose of giving a second chance to those cadets
who failed at the regular examination. This year the re-
examinations were abolished; but for what reason? It is
true that I had never been re-examined, but does it not
appear that the officers had concluded 'that Smith was
manifestly incompetent,' and that this means was taken
to deprive me of the benefit of a re-examination when
they decided that I was 'deficient?' Or was it done so
that the officers might have grounds for saying that 'he
did for him what had never been done for a white boy in
like circumstances?' Again, the examinations used to be
public; but this year two sentinels were posted at the
door of the library, where the examinations were held,
and when a visitor came he sent in his card by one
of the sentinels, while the other remained at the door,
and was admitted or not at the discretion of the
superintendent.
Pages:
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368