board gave its first year to a careful and impartial study of the special problems before it, and has continued that study every year in the light of the best practice in public charities elsewhere.  Its recommendations in its annual reports to the Congress through the Commissioners of the District of Columbia “for the economical and efficient administration of the charities and reformatories of the District of Columbia,” as required by the act creating it, have been based upon the principles commended by the joint select committee of the Congress in its report of March, 1898, and approved by the best administrators of public charities, and make for the desired systematization and improvement of the affairs under its supervision.  They are worthy of favorable consideration by the Congress.

The effect of the laws providing a General Staff for the Army and for the more effective use of the National Guard has been excellent.  Great improvement has been made in the efficiency of our Army in recent years.  Such schools as those erected at Fort Leavenworth and Fort Riley and the institution of fall maneuver work accomplish satisfactory results.  The good effect of these maneuvers upon the National Guard is marked, and ample appropriation should be made to enable the guardsmen of the several States to share in the benefit.  The Government should as soon as possible secure suitable permanent camp sites for military maneuvers in the various sections of the country.  The service thereby rendered not only to the Regular Army, but to the National Guard of the several States, will be so great as to repay many times over the relatively small expense.  We should not rest satisfied with what has been done, however.  The only people who are contented with a system of promotion by mere seniority are those who are contented with the triumph of mediocrity over excellence.  On the other hand, a system which encouraged the exercise of social or political favoritism in promotions would be even worse.  But it would surely be easy to devise a method of promotion from grade to grade in which the opinion of the higher officers of the service upon the candidates should be decisive upon the standing and promotion of the latter.  Just such a system now obtains at West Point.  The quality of each year’s work determines the standing of that year’s class, the man being dropped or graduated into the next class in the relative position which his military superiors decide to be warranted by his merit.  In other words, ability, energy, fidelity, and all other similar qualities determine the rank of a man year after year in West Point, and his standing in the Army when he graduates from West Point; but from that time on, all effort to find which man is best or worst, and reward or punish him accordingly, is abandoned; no brilliancy, no amount of hard work, no eagerness in the performance of duty, can advance him, and no slackness or indifference that falls short of a court-martial offense can retard him.  Until this system is changed we can not hope that our officers will be of as high grade as we have a right to expect, considering the material upon which we draw.  Moreover, when a man renders such service as Captain Pershing rendered last spring in the Moro campaign, it ought to be possible to reward him without at once jumping him to the grade of brigadier-general.