At the Capping Ceremony in connection with Victoria College at Wellington, on June 30, the Chancellor of the New Zealand University (Sir Robert Stout) delivered the following address:

I have much pleasure at again presiding at the graduation ceremony of the University in connection with the students of Victoria College.

Appreciatory Notes.

Before I deal with one or two subjects on which I propose to speak, I wish to refer to the death of the late Professer Cook, of Canterbury College. He was one of the first professors of Canterbury College, and he was for many years a member of the Senate of the University. He was appointed in 1884 to a seat on the Senate, and he was a senator until 1908, when he resigned. I can say of Kim that during all the time he was in the Senate he was ever careful, and anxious to do what could be done for the promotion of our University. It is not for me to speak of his teaching abilities, but I am sure his old students will never forget the able and arduous way in which he performed his duties. Many of his students obtained the highest honors obtainable in our University in mathematics, and throughout his whole career he ever showed great devotion to his profession, and a sincere regard for the welfare of all those who came under his tuition. I am sure that there ip no one connected with the University but who was grieved to hear of his break down in health, and his ultimate death, and that his family, whom he has left, has the deepest sympathy of all connected with education in New Zealand. I think I ought also to mention that we are about to lose the services of Mr Joynt as registrar. He will, however, remain connected with the University, as he has undertaken to perform the duty of Home agent in London. Speaking on behalf of myself—and I am sure I am only echoing the sentiments of other members of the Senate—Mr Joynt's absence from our future meetings as Registrar will be much regretted. We hope, however, that he may serve tie University for many years in his position in London. I am glad that I am able o congratulate Victoria College on having done good work during the past year. Many students have distinguished then pelves, some have obtained scholarships, and I have no doubt many have obtained the education that will fit them for their work in life. Of late there has been sone discussion about

University Reform.

This is a perennial subject in all universities, and therefore it is not surprising that it should be mentioned in New Zealand. We are all aware of what Her Teufelsdrockh thought of the university where he was educated. He said:

The university where I was educated still stands vivid enough in my remen-brance, and I know its name well; which name, however, I, from tenderness to existing interests and persons, shall in nowise divulge. It is my painful duty to say that, out of England and Spain, ours was the worst of all hithero discovered universities. This is, indeed, a time when right education is, us nearly as may be, impossible. Howeve, in degree of wrongness there is no limit; nay, I can conceive a worse system than that of the Nameless itself: as poisoned victual may be be worse than absolue hunger.

It is written; When the blind lead the blind, both shall fall info the [unclear: ditci.] Wherefore, in such circumstances, may page 2 it not sometimes be safer if both leader and led simply—sit still? Had you anywhere in Crim Tartary, walled in a square enclosure, furnished it with a small, ill-chosen library, and then turned loose into it eleven hundred Christian striplings, to tumble about as they listed, from three to seven years: certain persons, under the title of professors, being stationed at the gates to declare aloud that it was a university, and exact considerable admission fees—you had, not indeed in mechanical structure, yet in spirit and result, some imperfect resemblance of our high seminary. I say imperfect; for if our mechanical structure were quite other, so neither was our result quite the same. Unhappily, we were not in Crim Tartary, but in a corrupt European city, full of smoke and sin; moreover, in the middle of a public which, without far costlier apparatus than that of the square enclosure, and the declaration aloud, you could not be sure of gulling.

Gullible, however, by fit apparatus, all publics are; and gulled with the most surprising profit. . . .

The hungry young (he says further on) look up to their spiritual nurses, and for food were bidden to eat the east wind. What vain jargon of controversial metapaysic etymology, and mechanical manipulation, falsely called science, was current there, I indeed learned, better perhaps than most.

Though the quotation is not very flattering to what was. I suppose, meant to be a criticism of the methods of the University of Edinburgh, we have to remember that at the period at which Carlyle wrote that University turned out many able men who were heard of in the world, and not the least among the number was Thomas Carlyle himself. Perhaps if he had not been educated in the University of Edinburgh he would not have reached the position he occupied in the literary world. Some months ago there was published in England a rather interesting book by Lord Curzon, in the form of a memorandum to the Vice-Chancellor of Oxford, on the need of reform in that old University; and Professor Percy Gardiner published' some years before—in 1903 a little work called 'Oxford at the Crossroads,' in which he criticised the course of litteræ humaniores in the University of Oxford. Of late the University of Cambridge has been engaged on the question of reform in that University. I presume that the professors of Victoria College have kept in touch with what has been done and is being done in

University Reform in Europe.

I found in. England that there was no complete satisfaction with their existing institu-tions, and discussions as to reform were active. Some people, I know, amongst us think that the Welsh have been able to found, in the University of Wales, an institution that we should copy, and that it is the final word that has been said in university institutions. I found, on reading the newspapers in England, that many of the Welsh people were not content with their present institutions, and at one of the meetings in Wales the discussion was heated, and what appeared to me to be much exaggeration was manifested in the debate, but I suppose that even at reform meetings exaggeration—a frailty of humanity—Is not always absent. No one, I think, can therefore say that

The Ideal University.

has yet been founded amongst English people. Before we can discuss any reform we must have in our mind some plan or ideal. It would be as hopeless to decide what reform was to be, until we had this plan formulated, as it would be to start building a house without knowing what the building should be. I apprehend that a university should aim at training men and women, and in impairing knowledge to them of many things, and perhaps a full knowledge of one thing. There ought, I think, to be some guarantee that one who has been at a university should have some general culture. A graduate ought not to be one-eyed. A graduate should be able to see more than one thing. To send a student out of a university who can manipulate things—gases, liquids, etc.—as an expert chemist can, may be sending out of a university a very ignorant person. He or she may have gone through a course which Carlyle calls "mechanical manipulation, falsely called science," and yet he or she may be what Carlyle calls "'gullible." If nothing is known of history, nothing of philosophy, and nothing of what is termed humanity, the graduate may be unable to fulfil his or her duty as a citizen in the struggle for life. So, if a student knows only some classical languages and some history, and is ignorant of science, he also would be one-eyed, and have missed a great part of education. The University must therefore provide not merely for training two or three specialists in one or two subjects, but in giving a general culture to students. The great difficulty in university training, considering the vast number of subjects that now claim our attention, is to decide when to specialise and when to allow students to select one or two subjects and ignore all others. Until we can get an agreement on

What the Aim of a University Should Be,

it is hopeless for us to talk about reform, and I regret to say that in the discussions page 3 we have had lately, what a university should be seems not to have been kept in view. I recognise that nowadays the most important subjects for consideration are classed under the head of science. In New Zealand we ought ever to keep in view the limitations of our colony, and the need of our young people being trained in science, so that the industries of this colony may be fostered. I believe that a training in science can give as good mental training as the classics, and that if science is something more than a mere "manipulation of matter," it would fit men for the struggle in life better than any other subject they could study. But science so taught must be more than mere laboratory work. You must try and get an idea of the universe, and you must get a conception of the unity of knowledge. I further believe that a training in science is most important to make people truthful, and to make them cease to be "gullible," and that science perhaps of all knowledge will instil into the minds of her students 'an intense and self-sacrificing enthusiasm for truth." But along with science there must go some reference to history, and some reference to humanity, fur we must ever remember that we are not mere individuals, but that wo are members of a society having duties to that society, and we cannot perform our citizen duties properly if the whole of cur attention is directed to any one branch of knowledge. We have to govern ourselves, and we have to help to govern our country; but I do not think we can fitly do so without consideration of 30th history and literature.

A Scheme of Study must be Formulated.

It seems to me, therefore, that the first step that University Reformers should take would be to lay down what should be the scheme of the University studies. It may be that if we allow a person to specialise too soon in any one science we may make him useless as a member of the community. One eminent man, who was a scienlist as well as a philosopher, has said that to obtain a senior wranglership at Cambridge may have to mean an irremediable waste of human strength, useless to the man, and useless to the community, and so may intense specialisation in any one of the sciences, as Bain has pointed out in his book on 'Education as a Science.'

A Comparison of Syllabuses.

Having defined what the aim and goal of University Reform is, the reformer should see wherein the syllabus fails. I have compared our syllabus with those of all the English, Scottish, and Irish universities, and I confess that I do not think our syllabus is second to any of them. I havealso spoken to university authorities in most of the English and Scottish universities, and from all that I could gather our syllabus is one of which we have every reason to be proud. I believe, however, that it could be made more logical. I think that the science degree should be more strictly a science degree than it is now; but that we cannot get, unless we can obtain Art degrees, that make neither mathematics nor Latin compulsory. I do not know if the professors are prepared to go to that length. I have urged such reform for many years. I also believe that this system of "major" studies, which is in force in many American universities, and which is now in force in a modified form in Edinburgh, might now be adopted by us.

Limitation of Compulsory Subjects Necessary.

But that will fail unless we have our compulsory subjects more limited than they now are. I do not intend, nor have I the time at present, to deal fully with this subject. I would rather now deal very briefly with some of the statements that have been made by those who desire University Reform. So far as I can gather, the main reform demanded, is that the university professors should examine their own students, and if they certify that the students are fit for a degree, a degree should be granted by the New Zealand University If this scheme be adopted, I do not see the need of having a New Zealand University at all Each college would have to grant degrees. New, this is not the tendency of University Reform in England at present. It is not how one of the most recent universities deals with the granting of degrees.

Teachers as Co-examiners.

Let me refer to the University of Wales. It has three University Colleges—one at Aberystwith, one at Bangor, and one at Cardiff—and the law in Wales is that each of the colleges can appoint an examiner in each subject. The University appoints an examiner who is not a teacher at any of the colleges, who is termed an "external" examiner, and no degree can be granted unless the external examiner certifies that a degree should be granted. An article in the charter states that no examiner's report shall be received by the Court unless the external examiners have concurred in the said report I also find that it is quite inaccurate to say that in either Oxford or Cambridge the teachers are the examiners. I have gone carefully through the calendars of Oxford and Cambridge, and I find that there are scores of teachers who are not examiners in both of these universities, and that in all the page 4 colleges very few of the teachers are examiners. I take two colleges as an illustration of what exists. They are in what might be called the middle place in Cambridge, and are Emmanuel College and Jesus College, and I find that the tripose, mathematical, classical, moral natural patural! science, theological, law, historical, Hebrew, Oriental languages, modern languages, etc.—that is, out of eleven subjects examined on in Cambridge—Jesus College had only teachers in two of these subjects who were examiners, and Emmanuel College the same—only two subjects in winch they had examiners. I find the same thing at Oxford. Take, for example, the examination in physics there. I find that of the public examiners in physics and mechanics two colleges only were represent ed in the preliminary, and only one college in the final honor examination. It is true that in the Scotch universities the professors and teachers are examiners, but there are external examiners associated with the teachers. The practice is the same in Manchester, Manchester, for example, has fifty-nine external examiners. To say therefore, that in the universities of the world the teachers are always the examiners is absurd.

Some Pertinent Inquiries.

I would like to know exactly what is wanted to be done in New Zealand. Are the four professors, say in Latin, to be examiners in Latin for New Zealand? Is the examination to be approved of by the majority, or must they all concur? It is incorrect to say that our professors do not act as examinees. They are the main examiners in our matriculation examination, and no one can get a degree in the New Zealand University unless he has been passed by the professors, for every student must sit for an examination before his professr—must pass terms, as it called. Further, oral examinations are provided for under our present system. No one can pass in modern languages French and German—unless he has previously passed an oral examination by his professor, and no one can pass in science, in physics, or in chemistry unless he holds I certificate for practical work from his professor. There are, therefore, oral examinations in some subjects in our University, and there is an examination in every subject by a professor before the student can sit for his degree. I do not think that in we left the whole of the examinations to the professors it would at present be satisfactory, or that our degrees would be more esteemed than they are now. Now, what is the other subject in which it is said that we need reform? I confess I have not yet been able to discover any subject in all the discussion that has taken place; in fact, all the discussion of Reform seems to have centred round

The Question of External Examination.

I look forward to the time when we shall not need to go outside of New Zealand for our examiners. When we get a sufficient number of educated men, accustomed to examine and able to examine, we shall be able to rely on ourselves, and considering the progress we are making as a University the number of students that are distinguishing themselves both here and elsewhere, we may, I hope, soon be able to have local examiners; but that does not mean having only the professors as examiners. It has been said by some that we have

Too Many Examinations.

Perhaps we do. I would like to know if the professors are content to have no entrance examination at all, as was the case long ago in the Scotch universities, and no term or college examinations. Are these to be given up? I confess I do not see why our entrance examination, on being somewhat extended, should not serve as a junior Civil Service examination, and the two examinations in one year, and almost at the same time, which many students in secondary schools have to undergo, might not be made one examination. Examinations for decrees are, in my opinion, necessary. Might I give you a short extract which a young New Zealander in England sent me about two years ago, dealing with the subject of examinations and of professors acting as examiners.

It has been said that cramming should bo discouraged, and so should examinations, and that the students should receive their degrees according to the work they have done. How are you to tell what a man has done if you are not to examine him thoroughly? If there were no examinations, you would lower the standard of your degree to vanishing point. What is meant by work done? Is practical work iiioant?—for that is the only work that a professor knows anything about. And how can the professor tell what the student has really done in practical work even till he tests him in his work? It is common knowledge that the method of practical work varies enormously with different students, and whereas one man can do his work well, and do it so that it sinks in, another will do it in a slovenly manner. It may be slovenly done only so far as his brain is concerned, and so escape the professor's notice, and the very next day he may know nothing about it. Again, practi- page 5 cal work is, as a rule, a small matter in comparision with that which must be done by means of lecturefi and bookfi—eispeciaily the latter. With regard to lectures, if a check can be kept over students, yet some may be alert, and work hard to understand the lecturer, whilst others be mentally asleep. Again, what about reading? How is a professor to test what his student has understood in his reading? To abolish examinations would be a splendid method of letting through all the duffers and slow-witted specimens of the University. . . .

And he idds:

Is not ihe result aimed at the aiuouiit of knowledge the student has really absorbed, ai.d the only way you can satisfy yourself that the kudentJ has obtained knowledge is to examine him, nitten exiuninations to be supplemented by practical examinations, to see if he can do his practical work jji'operly. Oral examinations are the least ftatisfactory, as nervous jjien have more often failed in them than in written examinations.

The Value of our University Education Tested.

As to what the effect of University education has been in the past, I think I jnay say this: that the ordinary pass student in our University as a B.A. is just as well educated as the ordinary B.A. in the older Univereities of Britain. In fact, I heard from two of the examiners we had in Britain that in some subjects out New Zealand students were better prepared than students in Home Universities. I wiui informeil that one of the examiners had said that our LL.B.s gave better papers in Koman Law than those who sat for Roman Law in the University of London. Then, again, one examiner in English who was a professor of one of the Universities in Britain said that as a whole the University students examined from Xew Zealand were better prepared than those of the University witli which he was connectecl. We can test the value of our education by the success of our students who leave the University and go to various institutions in Britain, and I venture to say that our graduates are as well equipped as the ordinary pats student of any University anywhere. Our Rhodes scholars, considering their number, have done better than the German students, and the German students have come from their secondary schools, which, some of the professors say, excel ours.

What New Zealand Lacks.

Of course we have not the advantages of largo institutions like those in America and Europe. We have not the means, we have not the population, and our wealtliy men have not yet risen up to the conception of what their duty should be in helping this young community in giving the highest possible edcation to its citizens. Kvery year in America there are millions of pounds given for University purposes. Tne amount we have got for I'niversity purposes from our weiilthy men is very small. The only gentleman who left us anything large for Victoria College was the late Mr Jacob Joseph, and I hope his name will ever bo revered. He set an example which I had hoped many would ere this have followed. The only other large donation was, I think, that made by the late Mr Arthur Beverly to the Otago University. There are many wealthy men in our midst, and many wealthy citizens have passed away, but you will search our University records in vain to find many benefactions for higher edcation.

The Splendid Example of the United States.

If we consider the private benefactions given yearly to higher education in the United Statee we will see how little wo have done to help University education. Taking the throe past years, I find that the benefactions were in 1907 £4,764,412, in 1908 £5,087,694, in 1909 £3,709,817. But in 1909 there wore large gift, bestowed of which the returns had not been received by the Commissioner of Education when the amount was made up, and which are therefore not included in the amount put down for that year. The average, you will see, for the last three years is nearly four millions—namely, £5,853,974. If we had given at the same rate, according to our population, our average would have been over £40,000. We have not only not got £40,000 each year, but we have not got £40,000 altogether in the thirty-nine years since our first University was opened. I have not included in these benefactions the sums granted to Normal Schools, Dental Colleges, and other educational institutions, nor grants to libraries, museums, etc. There is much need for the development of the enthusiasm for higher education in our midst, and it is to the students of the University that we must look to call that enthusiasm into being.