board in place of Mr. John G. Clifford, resigned. It is obvious that by the system followed in these examinations the best safeguards have been established to secure uniformity and impartiality in the work of examining and grading.

At this competition there appeared fifty-eight applicants for third-grade clerkships, stenographers and book-keepers; twenty-one for first and second-grade clerkships, and ten for office messengers. Of the number, forty-three passed the required minimum mark for third-grade clerks, nineteen for first and second-grade clerks, and eight for office messengers. The general results are tabulated as follows:

TABLE SHOWING GENERAL RESULTS OF EXAMINATION, HELD NOVEMBER 11, 1886 — THIRd-Grade Clerks.

SUBJECTS.

Remarks.

31.80

25
21.80

50

Highest general average obtained, 93.70.

Lowest general average obtained by a proficient candidate, 70.45. Lowest general average of a deficient candidate, 43.03.

Not deficient in any subject, but below required average, three candidates.

Deficient in one subject, eight candidates; deficient in two subjects, six candidates; deficient in three subjects, five candidates; deficient in five subjects, two candidates.

FIRST AND SECOND GRADE CLERKS.

Highest general average obtained, 94.66; lowest general average obtained by a proficient candidate, 72.51; lowest general average of a deficient candidate, 57.23.

There was no candidate below fifty in any subject, but two failed to obtain the required general average, seventy.

The general scheme of examinations for clerkships in the State departments did not contemplate those positions demanding of their incumbents especial technical knowledge and experience, in addition to such skill and information as clerks are generally required to possess. The Commission, therefore, mindful of the needs of the service in this respect, designated a board of examiners for those seeking positions as law clerks in any of the State departments in which such appointments should hereafter be found necessary, to consist of Hon. Matthew Hale, Hon. William B. Ruggles and Hon. Edwin Countryman, of Albany. Five candidates appeared at this examination, the law questions for which were prepared by these examiners. All the applicants passed the minium of seventy, the following being the general results of the competition :

For Engineering Positions (Second Examination).

As at the May competition, the questions for the candidates for positions in the engineering service of the State were prepared, the examination personally conducted and the markings made by

the special examining board, consisting of Messrs. Bogart, Green and Horace Andrews of Albany, who had been designated as a member in place of Prof. Staley, whose removal from the State necessitated his resignation from the Board. This examination, requiring the presence of the examiners was confined to Albany. Six applicants were examined, of whom four were found qualified. The general result is stated as follows:

In addition to these, nine candidates were examined for positions as inspectors of masonry in the department of public works, all of whom were found qualified and their names entered on the eligible list.

For Guards - Elmira Reformatory (Second Examination.)

At Elmira, besides the general examination for clerical positions before referred to, twenty-three applicants for appointment as guards at the State Reformatory were examined. Seventeen passed and were entered on the eligible list. The table of results following will show a slight change in the scheme of examination, deemed advisable after consultation with the authorities of the institution:

For Interpreters of Courts (Second Examination).

An open competitive examination for court interpreters was held at the city hall in New York city, Saturday, November thirteenth. It was deferred from the eleventh of the month, on which day it was incumbent on me to be present at the general examination at Albany, and I deemed it equally important that I should personally superintend the interpreter's test at New York. The amended scheme of the examination, to which reference has been already made, was as follows:

First. Distinctly and deliberately a paragraph was read from the trial of a cause reported in a newspaper of that day. During the reading the candidates were directed to listen attentively, but not to touch pen to paper. Then, having in view the difference between English and German construction, the selection was read a second time by sentences, in order that the exact idea to be conveyed might be impressed upon the minds of those who were to interpret. This done, the candidates wrote in German, as the examiner again dictated in English a translation of the paragraph. Second. The condidates were directed to render the German translation in a second foreign language.

Third. This completed, the exercise was to translate from the second language into English.

Fourth. As the rule provides that interpreters shall undergo an examination as to general intelligence, of the character provided for clerks, the candidates were examined in arithmetic and in the geography and history of this country and of the countries in whose languages they sought examination.

Fifth. Forty-six questions and answers taken from an actual case, the questions printed in English and the answers in German, were placed before the candidates, with instructions to render the questions in German and the answers in English. The last ten questions and answers were then translated in a second foreign language.

Sixth. Each candidate was then tested as to his ability in reading and speaking the German language.

Six candidates presented themselves, one of whom not understanding German was found ineligible; four passed the required minimum and were entered on the eligible list. The following table will show, as in the other tests, some results of the examination :

For Prison Keepers and Guards.

The prison authorities of the State sought and obtained a modification of the rules respecting appointments of guards and keepers, so that a keeper may be selected from an eligible list of persons especially examined for that grade, as well as by promotion from the grade of guard. The rules were further modified by requiring as a requisite and competitive test of qualification for appointment as keeper, previous and satisfactory experience in directing or governing men. It was reasonably urged that one fully qualified to be a good guard would not necessarily become a successful keeper; so that promotion to the higher grade could not as a rule be predicated because of faithfulness and success in the lower. The Commission, in order to secure as practical a test as possible, designated as a board of examiners, under the rules as revised, Hon. Lewis D. Pilsbury, formerly Superintendent of Prisons in this State and at present warden of the New York Penitentiary; Hon. James W. Wadsworth, formerly State Comptroller, and Charles H. Kitchell, Esq., an active member of the New York Prison Association.

The scheme of the competitive examination for these positions embraced tests of the candidates' knowledge of simple computations, memory of dictated orders and faculty of observation. Each candidate was then brought before the examiners and closely questioned as to his habits, experience and judgment in matters of prison discipline. Seven candidates for positions as keepers and seventeen seeking appointments as guards were thus examined at Sing Sing, November eighteenth; of these, all the candidates for the higher grade and fifteen for the lower grade passed the minimum mark of seventy and were entered on the eligible lists, the general