"In reply to my complaint about the actions of the soldier in ordering my friends away from the visitors'

seats, he said that the soldier had misunderstood his orders, as the superintendent had told him to keep the colored servants on the 'Point' from coming in front of the battalion at parade, and that it was not meant to apply to my friends, who could come there whenever they wished.

"It seems, though, very strange to me that the soldier could misunderstand his orders, when he saw me sitting there in company with them, for it is one of the regulations of the Academy which forbids any cadet to a.s.sociate with a servant, and if I had been seen doing such a thing I would have been court-martialled for 'conduct unbecoming a cadet and a gentleman."

"The cadets were, of course, very much rejoiced at my being 'in arrest,' and after my sentence had been published at parade, they had quite a jubilee over it, and boasted of 'the skill and tact which Cadet Tyler had shown in putting the n.i.g.g.e.r out of the temptation of taking those black wenches to the hops.' They thought, no doubt, that their getting me into trouble frightened me out of any thoughts I might have had of attending the 'hops;'

but if I had any idea of going to the 'hops,' I should have been only more determined to go, and should have done so as soon as my term of confinement was ended.

I have never thought of going to the 'hops,' for it would be very little pleasure to go by myself, and I should most a.s.suredly not have asked a lady to subject herself to the insults consequent upon going there.

Besides, as I said before, I did not go to West Point for the purpose of advocating social equality, for there are many cadets in the corps with whom I think it no honor for any one to a.s.sociate, although they are among the high-toned aristocrats, and will, no doubt, soon be numbered among the 'officers and gentlemen' of the United States Army.

"Yours respectfully,

"J. W. SMITH, "Late Cadet U.S.M.A."

REPLY TO THE "WASHINGTON CHRONICLE."

"COLUMBIA, S.C., August 25, 1874.

To the Editor of the New National Era:

"SIR: The following article appeared in the Washington Chronicle of the 14th inst., and as I feel somewhat interested in the statements therein contained, I desire to say a few words in reference to them. The article referred to reads as follows:

"'The recent attack of the colored, ex-Cadet Smith upon the Board of Visitors at West Point has attracted the attention of the officers of the War Department.

They say that the Secretary of War was extremely liberal in his interpretation of the regulations on behalf of Cadet Smith, and that he did for him what had never been done for a white boy in like circ.u.mstances. The officers also say that Smith was manifestly incompetent, that he had a fair examination, and that the Congressional Board of Visitors unanimously testified to his incompetency.'

"Now, sir, I am at a loss to know what are 'the recent attacks of the colored ex-Cadet Smith upon the Board of Visitors,' for I am not aware that I have said any thing, either directly or indirectly, concerning the Board of Visitors. My remarks thus far have been confined to the Academic Board and Secretary of War.

"As the members of the Board of Visitors were simply spectators, and as they were not present when I was examined, I had no reason to make any 'attack' upon them, and, therefore, as I said before, confined my remarks (or 'attacks,' if that word is more acceptable to the Chronicle) to those who acted so unjustly toward me.

"As to the extreme liberality of the Secretary of War, in his interpretation of the regulations on behalf of Cadet Smith, and that he did for him what he had never 'done for a white boy in like circ.u.mstances,' I hardly know what to say; for such absurd cant seems intended to excite the laughter of all who know the circ.u.mstances of the case. What devoted servants those officers of the War Department must be, that they can see in their chief so much liberality!

"But in what respect was the Secretary of War so 'liberal in his interpretation of the regulations?'

"Was it in dismissing me, and turning back to a lower cla.s.s two white cadets who had been unable to complete successfully the first year of the course with everything in their favor, while I had completed three years of the same course in spite of all the opposition which the whole corps of cadets, backed by the 'powers that be,' could throw in my way? Or was it his decision that 'I can give Mr. Smith a re-examination, but I won't?' The Chronicle is perfectly correct in saying 'that he did for him what had never been done for a white boy in like circ.u.mstances,'

for, in the first place, I don't think there ever was 'a white boy in like circ.u.mstances,' certainly not while I was at the Academy, and if there ever were a white boy so placed, we are pretty safe in concluding, from the general treatment of white boys, that the secretary was not so frank in his remarks nor so decided in his action.

"'I want another cadet to represent your district at West Point, and I have already sent to Mr. Elliott to appoint one,' means something more than fair dealing (or, as the Chronicle would imply, partiality) toward the colored cadet. It means that the gentleman was pleasing himself in the choice of a cadet from the Third Congressional District of South Carolina, and that he did not recognize the rights of the people of that district to choose for themselves. 'You are out of the service and will stay out,' for 'the Academic Board will not recommend you to come back under any circ.u.mstances,' shows that it is the Academic Board That must choose our representative, and not we ourselves, and that our wishes are only secondary in comparison with those of the service and the Academic Board. We are no longer free citizens of a sovereign State, and of the United States, with the right to choose for ourselves those who shall represent us; but we must be subordinate to the Secretary of War and the Academic Board, and must make our wishes subservient to those of the above-named powers, and unless we do that we are p.r.o.nounced to be 'naturally bad'--as remarked the Adjutant of the Academy, Captain R. H. Hall, to a Sun reporter--and must have done for us 'what had never been done for a white boy in like circ.u.mstances.' Now, sir, let us see what has 'been done for a white boy in like circ.u.mstances.' In July, 1870, the President was in Hartford, Ct., and in a conversation with my friend the Hon. David Clark, in reference to my treatment at West Point, he said: 'Don't take him away now; the battle might just as well be fought now as at any other time,'

and gave him to understand that he would see me protected in my rights; while his son Fred, who was then a cadet, said to the same gentleman, and in the presence of his father, that 'the time had not come to send colored boys to West Point.' Mr. Clark said if the time had come for them to be in the United States Senate, it had surely come for them to be at West Point, and that he would do all in his power to have me protected. Fred Grant then said: 'Well, no d--d n.i.g.g.e.r will ever graduate from West Point.' This same young gentleman, with other members of his cla.s.s, entered the rooms of three cadets, members of the fourth cla.s.s, on the night of January 3, 1871, took those cadets out, and drove them away from the 'Point,'

with nothing on but the light summer suits that they wore when they reported there the previous summer. Here was a most outrageous example of Lynch law, disgraceful alike to the first cla.s.s, who were the executors of it, the corps of cadets, who were the abettors of it, and the authorities of the Academy, who were afraid to punish the perpetrators because the President's son was implicated, or, at least, one of the prime movers of the affair.

Congress took the matter in hand, and instructed the Secretary of War to dismiss all the members of the cla.s.s who were implicated, but the latter gentleman 'was extremely liberal in his interpretation of the regulations,' and declined to be influenced by the action of Congress, and let the matter drop.

"Again, when a Court of Inquiry, appointed by Congress to investigate complaints that I had made of my treatment, reported in favor of a trial by court-martial of General Gillmore's son, General Dyer's son, the nephew of the Secretary of War, and some other lesser lights of America's aristocracy, the secretary decided that a reprimand was sufficient for the offence; yet 'he did for me what had never been done for a white boy in like circ.u.mstances.'

Now, sir, by consulting my Register of the Academy, issued in 1871, I find that three cadets of the fourth cla.s.s were declared 'deficient ' in mathematics--Reid, Boyle, and Walker--and that the first named was turned back to join the next cla.s.s, while the other two were dismissed. Now Reid is the Secretary's nephew, so that is the reason for his doing 'for him what had never been done for a white boy in like circ.u.mstances.'

"Mr. Editor, I have no objection whatever to any favoritism that may be shown 'any member of the Royal.

Family, so long as it does not infringe upon any right of my race or myself; but when any paper tries to show that I have received such impartial treatment at the hands of 'the powers that be,' and even go so far, in their zealous endeavors to shield any one from charges founded upon facts, as to try to make it appear that I was a favorite, a pet lamb, or any other kind of a pet, at West Point, I think it my duty to point out any errors that may accidentally (?) creep into such statements.

"'The officers also say that Smith was manifestly incompetent, that he had a fair examination,' etc. What officers said that? Those of the War Department, whose attention was attracted by the 'recent attacks on the Board of Visitors,' or those who decided the case at West Point? In either case, it is not surprising that they should say so, for one party might feel jealous because 'the Secretary of War was extremely liberal in his interpretation of the regulations on behalf of Cadet Smith, and that he did for him what had never been done for a white boy in like circ.u.mstances,' while the other party might have been actuated by the desire to prove that 'no colored boy can ever graduate at West Point,' or, as the young gentleman previously referred to said, 'No d--d n.i.g.g.e.r shall ever graduate at West Point.' 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 circ.u.mstances?' 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. It is said that this precaution was taken because the visitors disturbed the members of the Academic Board by walking across the floor. Very good excuse, for the floor was covered with a very thick carpet. We must surely give the Academic Board credit for so much good judgment and foresight, for it would have been a very sad affair, indeed, for those gentlemen to have been made so nervous (especially the Professor of Philosophy) as to be unable to see how 'manifestly incompetent' Cadet Smith was, and it would have deprived the Secretary of War of the blissful consciousness that 'he did for him what had never been done for a white boy in like circ.u.mstances,' besides losing the privilege of handing down to future generations the record of his extreme liberality 'in his interpretation of the regulations on behalf of Cadet Smith.'

"Oh, that this mighty deed might be inscribed on a lasting leather medal and adorn the walls of the War Department, that it might act as an incentive to some future occupant of that lofty station! I advise the use of leather, because if we used any metal it might convey to our minds the idea of 'a sounding bra.s.s or a tinkling cymbal.'

"Respectfully yours,

"J. W. SMITH, "Late Cadet U.S.M.A."

THE NEGRO CADETS.

"We publish this morning an account of Cadet Smith's standing at West Point, which should be taken with a few grains of allowance. The embryo colored soldier and all his friends--black, white and tan--believe that the administrationists have used him shamefully, especially in view of their professions and of the chief source of their political strength. Grant went into the White House by means of colored votes, and his shabby treatment of the first member of the dusky army who reached the point of graduation in the country's military school, is a sore disappointment to them.

"Cadet Smith has been a thorn in the side of the Administration from the start. He could not be bullied out or persecuted out of the inst.i.tution by the insults or menaces of those who, for consistency's sake, should have folded him to their bosoms. He stood his ground bravely, and much against the will of its rulers. West Point was forced to endure his unwelcome presence up to the time of graduation. At that point a crisis was reached. If the odious cadet were allowed to graduate, his commission would ent.i.tle him to a.s.signment in our much-officered army, which contains Colonel Fred Grant and a host of other favorites whose only service has been of the Captain Jinks order. The army revolted at the idea. Theoretically they were and are sound on the n.i.g.g.e.r, but they respectfully and firmly objected to a practical ill.u.s.tration. The Radical General Belknap was easily convinced that the a.s.signment of the unoffending Smith to duty would cause a lack of discipline in any regiment that would be fearful to contemplate.

"Something must be done, and that something was quickly accomplished. They saved the army and the dignity of the horse marines by sacrificing the cadet. To do so, some tangible cause must be alleged, and a deficiency in 'philosophy' was. .h.i.t upon.

"In vain did Smith appeal to the Secretary of War for an opportunity to be re-examined; in vain did he ask permission to go back and join the cla.s.s below--all appeals were in vain. 'Gentlemen,' says the secretary, 'I don't wish to be misquoted as saying that I can't give Mr. Smith a re-examination, for I say I won't do it.' The victim of the army has since published a three- column card in Fred Dougla.s.s's paper, in which he says he was dropped for politico-military reasons, and in the course of which he makes an almost unanswerable case for himself, but the Radicals have dropped him in his hour of necessity, and he must submit."

(From the New York Sun.)

CADET SMITH'S EXPULSION.

"James W. Smith, the first colored cadet appointed to the Military Academy of West Point, was dismissed after the June examination, having failed to pa.s.s an examination in some other studies. Recently the Sun received letters from South Carolina charging that the prejudices of the officers of the Academy led to the dismissal; and to ascertain the truth a Sun reporter went to West Point to investigate the matter. He accosted a soldier thus:

"'Were you here before Smith was dismissed?'

"'Yes, sir; I've been here many years.'

"'Can you tell me why he was dismissed?'

"'Well, I believe he didn't pa.s.s in philosophy and some other studies.'

"'What kind of a fellow was he?'

"'The soldiers thought well of him, but the cadets didn't. They used to laugh and poke fun at him in Riding Hall, and in the artillery drill all of them refused to join hands with him when the cannoneers were ordered to mount. This is dangerous once in a while, for sometimes they mount when the horses are on a fast trot. But he used to run on as plucky as you please, and always got into his seat without help.

Some of the officers used to try to make them carry out the drill, but it was no use. I never saw one of the young fellows give him a hand to make a mount. He was a proud negro, and had good pluck. I never heard him complain, but his black eyes used to flash when he was insulted, and you could see easy enough that he was in a killin' humor. But after the first year he kept his temper pretty well, though he fought hard to do it.'

"Captain Robert H. Hall, the post adjutant, said: 'Young Smith was a bad boy.'

NATURALLY BAD

His temper was hot, and his disposition not honorable. I can a.s.sure you that the officers at this post did every thing in their power to help him along in his studies, as well as to improve his standing with his comrades.

But his temper interfered with their efforts in the latter direction, while his dulness precluded his pa.s.sing through the course of studies prescribed.

"REPORTER--'He was always spoken of as a very bright lad.'

"CAPTAIN HALL--'He was not bright or ready. He lacked comprehension. In his first year he was very troublesome.

First came his a.s.sault upon, or affray with, another young gentleman (Cadet Wilson), but the Court of Inquiry deemed it inadvisable to court-martial either of them.

Then he was insolent to his superior on drill, and being called upon for an explanation he wrote a deliberate falsehood. For this he was court-martialled and sentenced to dismissal, but subsequently the findings of the committee were reversed, and Cadet Smith was put back one year. This fact accounts for his good standing on the examination next before the last. You see he went over the same studies twice.'

"REPORTER--'What was Cadet Smith found deficient in?'