THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Resurrexi. TUESDAY, AUGUST 24, 1875.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2071, 24 August 1875, Page 2

THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Resurrexi. TUESDAY, AUGUST 24, 1875.

In a leading article published on the Bth of this month we drew the attention of those interested in the subject to some glaring inconsistencies in the management of New Zealand University. The New Zealand Herald has followed suit, and in the issue of the 20th thoroughly endorsed, almost to the letter, the remarks we then made as to the gross injustice with which the undergraduates of the university were treated. It has also pointed out a particular case in which an undergraduate certainly appears unfairly dealt with, and this from our own personal knowledge we can endorse, as well as point out another instance, the accuracy of which we can vouch for, though the injustice is not so palpable to those who merely look at the reiult«a,s tabled by Mr'H. J. lancred. It is nectssary to remind our readers that to enable a student to pass he must offer himself for examination in at least three subjects, and in each of these three subjects he must obtain one third of the

marks allowed—-certainly not too many to expect as we have iit a previous issue remarked. He may if he so please offer himself for examination in more than three subjects, so that if. he fails in, one he has still another string to his bow;: and this chance as we shall presently show, some of the candidates, avail themselves of. The instance referred to by the Herald (we give it in full) is this. Three candidates are mentioned who each took in three subjects and three only, consequently failure in either of these would amount—properly as we think—to failure in all. Two arc recorded as passed, one as failed, and yet the one who failed beat each of the others in one subject — and that a different one—wherein the successful candidates must have passed, showing that in these two subjects he must have passed himself, otherwise the places assigned are assigned unfairly, and in the third subject common to all three candidates, he is actually placed first! The following figures may better explain what we mean, the numbers opposite the name of each candidate showing the place awarded to him in the subject-under which the number appears:

Classic, e Sfe. English. S£ .. : J. Beveridge.. — -11 18 9 Passed. J. R.Wilkinson 7 13 6 — Passed. E. G. B. Moss 4 10 7 — Failed. So that Moss having beaten Beveridge in English literature, must be, regarded as successful,' otherwise—it being remembered that; Beveridge only offers three subjects—Beveridge, who is marked as passed, has faited. Hebeats Wilkinson in classics, and, for the same reason, must be considered as successful in that subject. He has,, therefore, passed in two subjects, and in the third, mathematics, which all three take in, he is placed first of the three, thus proving, according to the University's own figures, that he must have passed, if the other two have passed, and yet he is recorded as failed! Can anything be adduced tending more to" stultify the. examiners than this? There is yet another instance which seems to show that whoever is responsible for Mr Tancred's tables is guilty of gross carelessness. We said before that candidates were allowed to offer themselves for examination in more than three subjects, and that some avail themselves of this to offer four subjects, or" more, so that non-success in one may' be- compensated by success in another. ; Three gentlemen did this, one of them being Mr E. H. Power, of the Thames, classed among those:"; wjho, by; -a/ gross breach^ of all known, university etiquette, were trumpeted through the province as having failed. This gentleman offered himself in classics, English literature, and jurisprudence, taking in mathematics besides, not expecting to pass in it, as he had devoted no attention whatever to the subject, but simply taking it up - with a view of seeing what sort of a figure he would be likely td cut, should he wish to take up mathematics for his degree examination. We find this gentleman marked thus—

Classics. Math- Jurispru- Remarks. ematics. dence. E. S. Power,. 9 20 1 Failed to pass. The gross injustice here is this—that no mention whatever is made of English literature, one of the subjects on which Mr Power mainly relied, while a place is assigned to him in mathematics, in which he never expected success. It may well be asked what has become of Mr Power's place in English ? He must have had some place, even if last, as he took in the subject; he may have had a very high place, as it was one of the chief subjects with him. Even if he had only an average place in it yet he might have passed, as we find from the statistics that J. Beveridge, who was no higher than ninth, did so. But yet he loses all the advantage which he might have obtained from his position as first in jurisprudence, and is thrown back a year in his studies because the examiners obstinately ignore the subject in which he especially hoped, for success. We see that a committee has been appointed in Auckland to enquire into some very erident mistakes on the part of the University authorities. We hope this additional local grievance will also be represented to them that they may enquire into it at the same time. From the omission of Mr Power's place altogether from the number of those who took in English, the injustice is not apparent to those who merely study the university returns ; but it exists nevertheless, and" we think only requires to be made known to Colonel Haullaia and his coadjutors to ensure its being enquired into. The state of the University is no doubt unsatisfactory; yet, perhaps, not so unsatisfactory as the Herald of Saturday would make it appear. It certainly J3 not warranted in stating that a party exists who wish to assimilate the University to Oxford and Cambridge, because they allowthose who are masters of institutions affiliated to the university to examine their own students ; for no head of any college in Oxford or Cambridge is allowed to examine any member of his own college, nor* does the head as a rule have anything to do with any examination; whatever. Neither does the system of London University, which the Herald supports, and which we ourselves believe to be the only one practicable in New Zealand, allow a degree being taken by " all who can pa3S a certain examination, never mind where or how long they may have studied for the purpose," as the Herald ueems to suppose. On the contrary, London requires an entrance or matriculation examination equally with the rest; the fundamental difference between London and Dublin from Oxford and Cambridge being that the two latter insist on a! three years' residence of the undergraduates during term time within the precincts of the, university, which the ; two former leave optional.