UNIVERSITY REFORM. TO THE EDITOR.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXI, Issue 19, 24 January 1911, Page 7

UNIVERSITY REFORM. TO THE EDITOR.

Sir, — The Chancellor's attack upon the Reform Party is one that will certainly be replied to with a vigour equal to that of the Chancellor himself. In the absenco of some of the men more capable of dealing with tho matter, I make this preliminary reply, ait-hough it is just now impossible for me to find time for more than, a brief letter. On that account I deal with only one portion of the attack, a portion that would seom, to any one not acquainted with our real position, to be absolutely overwhelming. The Chancellor is reported as saying: "Further, if each college were to examine its own etudents, there would be a lack of co-ordination. . . ." Here, and in what follows, the Chancellor implies unmistakably that the reformers have taken up the position that each college should be a separate examining body. They have taken up no such position; nor any position that seems to me capable of being mistaken for that. The magnificent integrity of the Chancellor, and tho great respect in which we hold him, in spite of all our "differences," makes it utterly impobsiblo to suppose that he hus> intentionally misrepresented our position. Yet, th 6 suggestion am.de by somo of us that the four professors of a subject— one from each college — should torm an examining board for tha.l subject, cannot possibly contain the slightest warrant for the Chancellor's conclusion, nor, I believe, can any other suggestion that we have made. — I am etc. H. B. KIRK. Wellington, 2ist Janaary, 1911.