New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) FRIDAY, JULY 21.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 4783, 21 July 1876, Page 2

New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) FRIDAY, JULY 21.

We notice that the Hon. Captain Fraseii haa asked a question of the Government as to correspondence with reference to a suggested change in the governing body of the New Zealand University. We are pleased to see someone making a movement in this important and unsatisfactory matter. Wo have before clearly expressed our opinion that there is not much on which to dwell with complacency in the way the gentlemen composing the governing body of the institution discharge their trust. Judging by the evidences of fitness for the position which their management displays, we should say that by some moans or other these gentlemen, or at least a considerable number of them, have been placed in a situation which they are very ill qualified by experience or otherwise to till with credit and usefulness. Let us hero just point to one single specimen of the way they are attempting to direct the studies of the University. On referring to the last published calendar, that for 1876, we find at pages 59 and GO that the subjects for Greek comprise no loss than four plays of Aristophanes and four books of Thucydides or Herodotus. Truly, on reading this we are inclined to believe there must bo some misprint, or our eyes must-be deceiving

us. But the thing really does seem to bo set down according to deliberate intention. Now, on referring to the calendar of the Melbourne University for 1876, pages 132, 133, we find that the authorities of that_ institution are contented with requiring in this subject of Greek one play of Aristophanes and one book of Thucydides, that is, just one fourth of what is set down in the New Zealand curriculum. Again, on referring to the calendar of London University for 1866, we find on page 57 that for the second pass examination for 8.A., that body is satisfied with one Greek subject and one Latin prose subject, that the particular subjects for the year 1867 ar» in Greek one book of Thucydides, and one oration of Cicero in Latin. Bor the first pass examination no Greek is required, and for Latin in the year 1867 there are prescribed the Eclogues of Virgil and Cicero’s Tusoulan Disputations, Boole I. On comparing at the same pages in the three calendars to which we have referred it will be found that the Latin subjects in the New Zealand course are about double at least of those in the calendars of London and Melbourne Universities. The disproportion in Latin is bad enough, but that in Greek is simply monstrous. People who know anything about the matter know well that the Universities of London and Melbourne are among the very strictest examining bodies in the Empire. Anyone, too, who knows anything of the matter knows that to make up for examination a single Greek play is no mean test of scholarship ; in- fact, no one who is not a respectable Greek scholar can creditably meet an examination in one such play. But what are we to say of four plays of Aristophanes ? These are probably the most difficult of all Greek plays, or, indeed, apart from the subject matter, among the most difficult of all Greek books. That any young student with other work to make up for the same examination could be creditably prepared with four Greek plays, we say is a sheer impossibility. We challenge contradiction to this statement. Now, we ask, in perfect good faith, for truly we are nonplussed, what on earth do the Senate of the University mean by this eccentric proceeding 1 If they really do expect the thing to be done, then they prove emphatically that they are practically, at any rate, quite incompetent to fill such a position. Can it possibly be supposed that knowing well the utter impracticability of what they seemingly require of students, they merely mean this curriculum as a sort of advertisement? Do they really expect to impose upon the public by this bumptiousness ?_ Will any one be so destitute of plain common sense as to believe that in New Zealand, with its crude and undeveloped school system, and its infant but ambitious University, we are already in a position thus to crow, as it were, over established institutions like those of London and Melbourne ? We shall probably be told that this subject of Greek is not compulsory. But this does not render the question one whit less pertinent —is this subject meant to be a reality or a sham? If the former, then it is proof positive that the persona who prescribed it knew nothing practically about the thing they were handling ; if, on the other hand, it was merely meant for display, and not to be taken up in serious earnest, then the ingenuous way of going to work would be to exclude the subject altogether. It would hardly be possible to overstate the extent to which any attempt by a student to prepare this monstrous subject of Greek would derange and thwart all his other studies. It would most certainly render all other work as nearly as possible worthless, and would itself be as good as worthless also.

This is not at all the only matter which might be adduced as showing incompetence in the governing body of the New Zealand University ; but it is apposite, and sufficient for the present occasion. We believe a critical examination of the sort of questions which, for instance, sometimes appears in the papers set to candidates, would show in some of the examiners appointed a precisely analogous want of practical competence to that betrayed in the curriculum of study. _ We must again repeat here there is very little in the management of this most ambitious and expensive institution which is calculated to inspire confidence. We hope that Captain Eraser will not drop the subject until something is done towards inaugurating a change in the entire constitution, management, and endowment of this most ambitious, expensive, and unsatisfactory establishment.