The Press. FRIDAY, MARCH 13, 1896. THE FINANCES OF CANTERBURY COLLEGE.

Press, Volume LIII, Issue 9364, 13 March 1896, Page 4

The Press. FRIDAY, MARCH 13, 1896. THE FINANCES OF CANTERBURY COLLEGE.

The Canterbury Progressive Liberal Association has disco vered a mare's nest in the finances of the College Board of Governors. It has lit upon the fact that in its balance sheet occurs the sura of £2500 under the general head of % " incidentals." And, says the Liberal Association, as " incidentals " are generally interpreted to mean postage stamps, envelopes, and pen-wipers, here is an awful piece of extravagance —a criminal waste of public money! We shall presently expose the absurdity of this criticism. Meantime, we wish to explain that we have no objection to the Association making a pet hobby of Canterbury College. On the contrary, we admire,, the persistency, amounting almost to heroism, with which for some years past the members have returned again and again to the charge in the face of discouragement and apathy on the part of the public. They hold conferences, draft constitutions, conduct investigations, submit repotcs with much earnestness and deliberation. At election times they feed the candidates with questions on the subject; and from time , to time they used to reprove the late Minister for Education for his apparent indifference to their efforts. But the agitation remains now where it was three or four years, ago, and for this reason—that the public are satisfied the Board performs the arduous and complicated functions entrusted to it with efficiency, honesty, and, generally speaking, with success. And so long as it continues to do that, the sensible public does not care the proverbial rap for abstract discussions and theoretical dissertations on its constitution or mode of election. Perhaps its constitution is all wrong; possibly life membership is a mistake; possibly also it ought to be elected by a wider. constituency. These are matters of opinion; and we do not to discuss them now. But 'the practical result is on the whole satisfactory te the public, and that's all the public cares about. The Board has an excellent record; it fosters the interest of education in an enlightened and liberal spirit; and when we remember the complex nature of its responsibilities, the hours and hours per week many members have tq, spend in Committee work, we think it fair and reasonable' to say that thero is no unpaid Board in the whole colony that does, without money and without price, so much work with such general success. But, as we have said, its constitu-; tion and method of election are matters on which there may well be diversity 01. opinion. And the Liberal Association is entirely within its rights ml agitating that question and in seeking to. gain converts to its own' view" of it. Wβ have no quarrel with the Association on that score.V But when it comes* to matters not of opinion, but of fact, we must insist on the facts being fairly and honestly presented, and that the public be not misled by wilful or ignorant misrepresentation. And this latest effort of the Association to throw discredit on the financial management of the Board is at once absurd and misleading. The "report" produces the impression that £2500 of public money is either wasted or extravagantly frittered away and that the Board does not effectively control this item of expenditure. Anyone acquainted with the conduct of a mercantile concern is familiar with the item " charges " in the balancesheet. It comprises a hundred varieties of expenditure, small individually, but considerable in the aggregate, which are lumped together in the balancesheet for convenience of reading and a understanding it. Th'e books of the office contain full and accurate details of these "charges," but to particularise them in a balance-sheet would be to render that document cumbersome and unreadable. So with the " incidentals " of the Board, which are no larger in proportion to it 3 total expenditure than " charges " in the balance sheet of a mercantile concern ; and not as large in proportion as the item "unauthorised expsnditure" in a Parliamentary Budget. The Progressive Liberal Association appears to think that the £2500 is spent in blotting paper and pen wipsrs. Now, as a matter of fact, there is not an

item in the •«incidentals" that is not renewed and approved by a Departmental Committee. Accurate and detailed accounts of the items are kept at the College, and, no doubt, the courteous Registrar would show them to any one who could assert a legitimate claim, other than frivolous inquisitivenass to inspect them. These details are, with the. rest of the balance-sheet, audited by the Government-, and appended as schedules "to the Board's financial statement. They cover scores of pages and could not possibly be incorporated in detail in the balance-sheet itself. Further there is not a single item of expenditure out of the ordinary recurring ones, such as charges for coal, gas, &c, that can be incurred by any official of the College except on production of a " requisition form " duly signed by the Chairman. Now, as to the nature of the items. We have been at some trouble to note them, and will reproduce the information we have obtained for the benefit of the Liberal Association. The "incidentals" in the College account proper do indeed include stationery and cheque-books and such things. But they embrace besides " cost of printing the College Calendar " —a heavy but necessary item; "advertising course of lectures," &c.; keeping the quadrangle lawn mown and the hedges trimmed; sweeping the College chimneys ; washing the College "dusters;" soap and candles; fuel; repairs to furniture; ironmongery. Moreover, in " incidentals" are included legal expenses connected with valuation and ife-letting of reserves. Ail these things are grouped together as " incidentals," it is true, but full accounts are kept, and these are passed in detail by the members of the Board, and are audited and, we believe, " found correct" by the Government official. It will probably relieve the minds of the Liberal Association to know, that we find no trace of items of champagne either bluntly put or under the euphemistic designation of " brass nails" in the balance sheet. And indeed we can assure the Association that the Board are apparently " indifferent honest."

And as to the " incidentals" for the schools. These include "materials for Sloyd classes," i.e., manual and technical education ; grants to cricket club and Cadet Corps ; grants to the school libraries, "prizes," "cleaning the swimming bath" — a harmless necessary operation, washing the school dusters, " winding and repairing the clocks," erecting fences, trimming hedges, and such like justifiable and necessary expenditure. In all the "incidentals" we have examined there is only one single item that is not accurately and minutely detailed, and that is the enormous amount " petty cash £117s 5&." The Liberal Association may think it worth its while to probe this dark mystery of " petty cash." We haven't time.

There is one other point in the financial criticism we wish to draw attention to. It is this : The salaries in the Boys' High School amount to £14 103 per pupil, in the Girls' High School to £11 odd. With regard to the first we believe if there is one fault in the management of the Boys' High School it is that the classes, for the efficient'teaching' of secondary subjects and the imparting of a liberal education, are if anything too large, and that consequently the average cost in salaries per pupil is, if anything, too small. And as regards the disparity between the salaries of men and women, which we are surprised and pleased to find is much less than wa expected, the Board cannot be justly blamed for a social system for which they are not responsible. For reasons that are tolerably comprehensible, women are willing and eager to work for less wages than men in all callings. We should like to see the earnings of men and women equalised if this could be done, riot by levelling down but by levelling up. But, meantime, the facts are as we say. And the Board would not be justified in insisting on paying woman higher salaries than those they are willing to work for, and which are in vogue in other places, simply because it held such and such theories on the " emancipation " question. It has a duty to the public; it is. bound to ad minister its funds economically, com , patible with efficiency. Arid while women are willing and eager to accept a,slightly lower scale of remuneration than men, the Board has no right to insist upon paying them more. It would be absurd to say the salaries of

its women teachers are unfair compared with those paid in other places. Even the Liberal Association would scarcely accuse the Board of " sweating." Its payments' are liberal and equitable; that is why it is so loyally and so efficiently served by its staffs. Let the Association by all means agitate for; a revolution; it will find it an uphill task to stir the public up to thrust out a Board it knows \o be good, however oligarchic, in order to * sub3titute another Board, however democratic, whose efficiency and success it cannot predict. It will probably prefer to bear the ills it has, if it has any, rather than fly to others that it knows not of, merely to satisfy an abstract theory of representation. But whatever steps the Association takes in this agitation, we trust it will always be careful to present matters of fact fairly and clearly to the public of the colony.