The New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY.) THURSDAY, MAY 23, 1878.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5352, 23 May 1878, Page 2

The New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY.) THURSDAY, MAY 23, 1878.

There, are.,, certain journalists who, as a matter of pleasure, or of business, devote themselves to fishing for those pearls of profligacy supposed to I be ,found exclusively in tho official oyster. Tito mannerof treatment of that curious bivalve; 'after] it has been brought into the air and light' by those gbhtlemeh," differs according to the constitution of tlje finder. By the one it is treated “ lovingly,’' as old Isaac Walton treated,,his wormthe.sharp, knife of inquiry,: or the slim and tentative probe, in the shape of an awl, is in - , sinuatpd between the shells; the mantle is carefully turned up; and a neat dissection reveals the t( pearl” when it exists, with all its abnormal or diseased surroundings. If it do notexist. the oporation loaves the subject a chance of continued existence when it is returned ..to., its . native • ele-, ment. Tho other kind, of' operator is the man whose sense ;of, public duty obliges him always to *.? call a spade, and whose-nature, wlie* l a spade would answer his purpose,, always impels' him :tO' use 'a. crowbar ,or a aieclgp hammer. When he catches his oyster ho assumes : the existoucamf JJie.pearJ,»a»dJ?rscepds tp_ smash'the. gentle mollusc, asjaislaughterman does a bullock—with a polo-az;e Pearls beii%fhdj^ily,i&e^h'o:ordinarily .i a .t o i « .a *-* -f. a d j, o

These differing styles of general treatment are exemplified respectively by our contemporaries Times” and the “ Otago DailyvTimes.” The most modern instance of theistylo of the latter . is that wjhich was exhibited hot r'ih tlie-Novv- Zealand examination at Christchurch. :Tt appesvvs that incompl&to information ’as tif jtho facts had reached our Otago contemporary, and resulted in much glorification of Dunedin as the ‘modern Athens to whichßall the clever students of Now Zealand must come for their'education." But tho satisfaction was not unclouded. There was something profligate in the distribution of the’ scholarships, and this is tho way in which our contemporary instantly “smashed” tho Chancellor and the Examiners ; ~} ” “tocS'Jealousy, wo regrot to any wo cannot qsiirlbe it to nny other cause, seems to have been at work in the distribution of tho scholarships, These are' given under the Act to those who pass tho degree examination with especial credit. In the published list wo And that scholarships have been given to one Otago man who has passed, to the one solitary passedJmau sent up for examination by the intellectual city of Christchurch, and that scholarships, In deilanCe of the plain letter of tho law, have been given to two students who are not among those who succeeded in satisfying tho independent examiners for the degreeexamination, When wo understand that the degree —examination papers are submitted to examiners on tho other side, but that the scholarships are allptteu bore, or rather in Christchurch, it will be soenithftt we are justified in suggesting foul play. Wo repeat that whether tho Otago men get these scholarships or not. it is simply illegal to give them to any one who has not passed his degree examination. Mr. Tailored, the Chancellor of the Now Zealand University, is tho executive officer of that institution, and on him tho blame must fall, Wo understand that prompt stops are about to bo taken to enquire into tho matter, and, if necessary, to teat tho justice of what he has done in the Law Courts.

Whereupon the “ Lyttelton Times” job served that—

The position which tho “ Otago Daily Times'” has taken np with regard to the University examination Is not enviable. The result of these examinations reached onr contemporary by telegraph in ..a Mutilated form. In that form that result was exceptionally favorable to Otago. Tine - circumstance .was so dazzling that editorial caution was thrown to. the winds, and an egregious solecism was the natural con* sequence. It is not a little suggestive that a. very slight exertion of the critical faculty would have prevented such an exhibition, for if the results as telegraphed to tho “ Otago Daily Times”had been correct it was plain that the authorities of the University had broken the law which they are bound to administer. Slost reasonable men, knowing the-character of tho Chancellor and those acting with him, would have hesitated under the circumstances to have accepted the telegraphed account as correct. In.a question between the correctness of a telegram and the character of a gentleman of proved honor and integrity, tlie majority of sensible mankind would have decided against the telegram. Even biassed minis would have spent a shilling in verifying the telegram, before coming to judgment, and the drawing of conclusions. But the editor of the “ Daily Times” on this occasion did not belong ‘to the sensible portion of mankind, and saved his smaller coins. With him, everything must give way to tho glorification of Otago. Ho declared unhesitatingly that the Chancellor had been guilty of “an impudent and Indefensible breach of trust,” and til us established, to his satisfaction, tile correctness of tire telegram ho had received. Upon this basis ho raised a lingo structure of glorification of the Otago University, interwoven with the most scurrilous abuse of what is not Otagan a structure whicli a very slight breath of criticism is sufficient to dash to the ground. , .

There was, if we remember _ rightly, something said, on the other side also, about “testing the justice of what had “been done, in the Law Courts,” and we are glad to : be able to record that on the 14th instant the “ Otago Daily Times,” not very, graciously indeed, admitted its error. We give the explanation and apology furnished by our contemporary The telegram from the Press Agency, which according to the peculiar procedure of the Agency came to us from Wellington, read as follows: — The following is the result of the University undergraduate examination, 1878 :■ -Passed final examination and entitled to B.A. degree ;—Pitchett, Hill, Newton, Eattray, Tisdale. Passed second section : Barclay, Cameron, Farnie, Montgomery, White. Wilkinson. The following have gained senior scholarships: Farnie, Hay, Herbert, Wilkinson. The result of the junior scholarships will probably be published to-morrow. . , For the purpose of comparison, we give the following paragraph, clipped from the rhrischurch “Press” of the same date, as that .on which the Press Agency telegram appeared in our columns, and which we have no doubt contains, the true, version of the case , Tho ! following gentlemen ’have passed the final examination, and are entitled to the B.A, degree A. ‘ E. Fitchett, Otago University: H. T. Hill and A. 0. Newton, Canterbury College; E. H. Eattray and W. 81. C. T. Tisdall, Auckland. Tho first four of these passed under the old regulations. The following have passed the first section of the B.A. examination F. Fitchett, J. Hay. W. H. Herbert, and J. W. Wilkinson, of Canterbury College; A. E. Barclay, A, Cameron, T. C. Farnie. J. Montgomery, and D. White, of Otago. The following have gained senior scholarships T; O. Fatnie, of OtagO ;J. Hay. W. H. Herbert, and J. K. Wilkinson; of Canterbury College. From this it will be seen that we unwittingly did a great injustice to a number of young gentlemen whose names were excluded by the Press Agency from the list of graduates, and in commenting on the subject, and on the apparent conferring of scholarships on those who were not entitled to them according to law,, wo equally unwittingly did a great injustice to the authorities of the University. . . • . In this case, as we now learn, there has been no wrong doing, the trouble being but a phantom of the muddled brain of the Press Agency. Nevertheless, for the unwitting share which we have had in it—, although more sinned against, than sinning—yet a little sinning too—we desire to express our regret and sincere apologies to the Chancellor and officers of the University, for having piled up the agony. As tor our hysterical glorification of Otago, we shall cheerfully bear all thp chaffing it deserves., ,

We are not without a kind of journalistic sympathy for our Otago contemporary in his unpleasant “fix.- 1 ’ It weakens the general moral fprce ; of-“we” when any one of the great powers is forced to stoop publicly to wipe.up a -“mess ’’ of this kind. The moral is, wa think, “ Don’t “ assume the,existence of a pearl of pro- “ fligacy in every official oyster; and before you ‘smash’ make preliminary “ inquiry as to the .probabilities, oven if “ it should cost a shilling.”

; It is no part of our duty to defend the Press. Agency... Ik,is not infallible; forced as it is id depend upon a multiplicity of agents,' it will necessarily fall into errors. But we ! think it is much better and more . reliable , under its present mdhagerherit than it would be in the hands in which gentlemen connected with the “ Otago Daily Times” lately endeavored to have it placed.