NEW ZEALAND UNIVERSITY.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 4786, 25 July 1876, Page 2

NEW ZEALAND UNIVERSITY.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW ZEALAND TIMES. Sir, —With what great pleasure I read your most able and instructive leader you can easily imagine. Pray let me have space to support you as much as I can. The management of the New Zealand University at first, in a secretarial sense, was of course very incomplete, and the then University Council did not grasp at all the difficulties of beginning a University scheme in a new country. I bad to write repeatedly for information, and only got routine answers. In the printed announcements of the subjects of examinationfor 1874, with names of text books, which I received, was the following, nearly as I give it, and as it is found exactly in the Calendar for 1874 : “ History.—European History for A.D. 1106 to A.D. 1458 ; Hallam’s ‘Literature of the 15th, 16th, and 17th Centuries’; Bryce’s‘Holy Roman Empire’ ; Creasy’s ‘ British Constitution.’ ” This was one of the subjects out of three compulsory. This information, 1 think, I received two or three months after the beginning of the University year. Some of these books could not be obtained for me by a Wellington bookseller in Melbourne, and were got from England. So far as I could make out the foregoing announcement, and being guided especially by the fact that one text book, Hallam’s “ Literature," had practically nothing to do with the period of history prescribed, I inferred that all the text books named, as well as some general History of Europe, had to be read up. I tried it. But with the mathematical subjects—arithmetic, algebra, euclid, and trigonometry, elementary works ; and the English subjects—Shakspere’s “King John” and Trench’s “ History of the English language,” I found my strength so terribly tasked that I had to give way, throwing on one side some of the work. Bear in mind, please, that I had written to know whether those portions of the text books referring to the period in question (1106 to 1453) only had to be studied, or whether they had to be studied as distinct divisions of the subject, and that I could get no answer. Imagine my surprise when I received a few days before the examination a corrected copy of the syllabus, which then appeared as follows ; —“ History. European History, 1106 AH. to 1453 A.D.; text books recommended—Hallam's ‘Literature,’ Bryce’s ‘ H. B. Empire’, Creasy’s ‘ B. Constitution.’ ” Here I had been reading up the whole of these two last works, or portions of a subject, when I need only have read those portions of them referring to the period in question. I am glad to say I did not fail, but I did not take a high place among the other students. - <■ Again was a case last year deserving of 1 strong censure. Under the head of “ History” appears only this simple announcement, Merivale’s “Roman Emperors.” I wrote both to Messrs. Lyon and Blair and Messrs. T. A. Bowden and Sons. Neither of them knew of such a work. I asked Mr. Bowden iu particular, who took some trouble to inform me. There seemed only one work of Merivale's that the designation. Merivale’s “ Roman Emperors ” would apply to, namelv, Mcrivale’s “ History of the Romans under the Empire.” I wrote to the University officials, but only the old superb reference to the secretary or the calendar—what the authorities meant by Merivale’s “ Roman Emperors ” I could not get to know. Accordingly the firm 7 from whom I obtain my books sent to Melbourne for Merivale’s “Romans under the Empire,” 8 volumes, which I thought and hoped would bo of large type and few pages. It came one or two months after the beginning of the University year, and I found it of small

type and many pages—from 400 to 500 in each volume. This shocked me. A work of about 3580 pages, equal to Gibbon’s “ Decline and Dali of the Roman Empire," or three volumes as large as Smith’s “Student's Hume.” With strength already too much bowed, I gave up the task—wisely, I hope. So much for the management of our overreaching, and, I am afraid, half-incapable University. Let me, however, revert again to the standard of examination for the B.A. degree in the New Zealand University and the M.A. degree in the Melbourne University. The questions may be more severe in the Melbourne University than in the New Zealand University—l cannot say; but they seem very severe in our own University. New Zealand —B.A. degree ; Latin language and literature, mathematics (four branches) and throe other subjects, say, English language and literature, general history and political economy, astronomy and meteorology. Melbourne —M.A. degree: Astronomy only. It will be seen that to obtain a Bachelor of Arts degree in the New Zealand University a student must take up five extensive subjects—indeed very extensive subjects. Advanced mathematics includes the elementary—the Master of Arts degree includes the Bachelor of Arts degree. Now please allow me to compare the text books as recommended by the respective Universities : —B.A. (New Zealand): Hersohel’s “Outlines of Astronomy,” P.S. Main’s “Introduction to Plane Astronomy,” Airy’s “ Ipswich Lectures on Astronomy,” also some works on Meteorology. M.A. (Melbourne): “ Herschel’s Outlines of Airy’s “Ipswich Lectures on Astronomy,” Main’s Astronomy, the “Explanation” of the. Nautical Almanac. It will thus be seen that the text books for the Master of Arts degree in Melbourne are almost the same as the text books for one out of five subjects for the Bachelor of Arts degree in New Zealand. I beg you to insert this letter if you can. The New Zealand University, with its, to my mind, absurdly high standards, is practically useless, and should have its action publicly exhibited and criticised.—l am, &c., T. Wakelix*. Grey town, July 22.