(and by this was meant written answers to printed questions on scholastic subjects) was "held;" the papers were returned to the examiners and rated, and lo, John Smith stood at the head of the list. No one knew John Smith "had it in him;" indeed some of his friends suspected that it wouldn't stay in him long; as a matter of fact, it often was demonstrated that book knowledge did not guarantee the competency of an employee.

Then began the era of attack on civil service examinations; business men declared them " impractical," "unbusiness-like," etc., etc. The force of these criticisms was gradually impressed upon civil service commissions throughout the country, and then was introduced an "experience rating" into all examinations for positions requiring special skill. There was yet reluctance on the part of appointing officers to select from eligible lists, prepared in the old way, for filling positions whose duties called for the exercise of judgment, tact and personal initiative. The result was the introduction of an "oral examination," or rating on "personal qualifications" after an interview with the examiners.

One of the objections urged against oral examinations is that they do not admit of exactness in ratings. But what are the ratings on written examinations? We too often lose sight of the fact that they are ratings of the candidate's answers, and not ratings of the candidate; what may be less exact than the rating of written answers as compared with the candidate himself. This touches the fundamental weakness in civil service examinations; candidates are not rated, answers and statements are rated, which is a very different thing. In this view of the matter, then, a rating of the candidate on an oral interview is probably nearer his true value than the rating of his answers on a written examination.

An experience of some years in civil service examining work has convinced me that oral examinations are of great value in determining the comparative qualifications of competitors. It is, of course, as a practical matter, impossible to include oral tests. in examinations for all positions, but in case of such positions as bank examiner, institutional superintendent, trial counsel, and all other high grade positions involving executive responsibility, forensic ability, etc., and where the duties require the incumbent to represent his department in dealing with the public, and in all

similar or cognate positions, I deem the oral examination of great importance as corrective of the inherent weakness of the purely written test. In fact I would prefer to base my judgment of candidates on the rating of personal qualifications on an oral interview, rather than on the rating of written answers to examination questions. Oral examinations tend to weed out competitors whose only hope of securing a position lies in their ability to "pass a purely written examination where no attempt is made to ascertain the candidate's personal qualifications for the position.

Promotion Examinations

The following table gives statistics of promotion examinations held 1908 to 1915, inclusive:

The above table shows that in 1915 we held fourteen competitive promotion examinations in which three or fewer candidates competed; that is to say, that in 34 per cent of the competitive promotion examinations there was no real competition, although in these same examinations 263 persons were entitled to enter and were actually notified of the opportunity to compete for promotion. This shows that competitive promotion examinations, in many cases, are not really competitive.

The number examined in open competitive examinations in 1915 is the largest in the history of the Commission, exceeding by 2,691 the number examined in 1914, which year showed an increase of more than 9,000 over 1913. Notwithstanding the large number of candidates examined the Commission has been able to rate papers and report lists with greater promptness than ever before, owing to the appointment of an additional examiner paid from temporary funds and to the detail, at various times, of thirteen different examiners from various departments, and to the employment of three temporary examiners who served a total of fortyfive weeks.

Provisional Appointments

The following table shows the number of persons examined noncompetitively for provisional appointment during the years 1911 to 1915, inclusive:

Non-Competitive Examinations

Noncompetitive promotions are held under the provisions of Civil Service Rule XIV, section 4. The table given at the beginning of this report shows that 82 persons were promoted under this rule. Noncompetitive provisional examinations are held under the provisions of Civil Service Rule VIII, section 4, which provides that "whenever there are urgent reasons for filling a vacancy in any position in the competitive class, and there is no list of persons eligible for appointment after competitive examination, or the existing list contains less than three names, the appointing officer may nominate a person to the commission for non-competitive examination" to fill the vacancy until a list shall be established as a result of an open competitive examination. Under this rule there were 472 persons appointed and examined, which is less than half the number so appointed in 1914.

Noncompetitive examinations under Civil Service Rule VIII, section 10, are those held where a duly advertised competitive examination results in a list of less than three names. In 1915 there were twenty-seven such appointments made.

Again referring to the table at the beginning of this report, items 6 and 7 refer to examinations for positions in the noncompetitive class, for which 2,746 persons were examined in 1915. The great majority of these positions are in the state hospitals and charitable institutions, such as attendants, barbers, butchers, carpenters, cooks, dairymen, florists, gardeners, housekeepers, linemen, masons, nurses, plumbers, roofers, slaters, tinsmiths, ward helpers, watchmen, etc.

Noncompetitive examinations given at the hospitals and institutions are conducted by institutional boards of examiners who forward all papers to the Commission for inspection and approval.

Competitive Examinations

Of course the great bulk of the work falling on the examinations division is caused by the competitive examinations. The number thus examined in 1915 was 19,744, an increase of 2,746

over 1914, and an increase of 9,874, or 100 per cent, over 1913. While there has been this steady increase in examining work there has been practically no increase in the force of examiners, and it has been possible to get out our work promptly only by sending papers to outside examiners to be rated, by hiring temporary examiners to do work in our office, and by soliciting the aid of other departments by loaning or "detailing" to us men to act as examiners while still paid by the loaning department as provided for in section 4 of the Civil Service Law. This will be referred to subsequently in this report.

Growth of the Work

The steady increase in the amount of work devolving upon the examinations division is shown by the following table giving the number of persons examined by five-year periods and the number and per cent of increase in each case over the preceding period:

As evidence of the assertion that appropriations have not kept pace with the growth of the work, there is given below a table showing the total amount of appropriations for the Commission's use by five-year periods, and the amount and per cent of increase in each case over the preceding period.