THE CHANCELLOR AND CAPPING DAY.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXI, Issue 103, 3 May 1911, Page 2

THE CHANCELLOR AND CAPPING DAY.

t »—,» — , _ i TO THE BDITOtt. Sir,— Sir Robert Stotit persists- in his attempt to throw upon tho professors blame in connection with the heinous offence of the students in leaving the hall in accorda-nce with his suggestion. He is really somewhat entertaining. Ho actually makes an admission — nob a. usual thing for him to do — but then, ib is a very slender one. Ho admits that he. has on several occasions said " that tho American system (sic) of an auditor leaving the audience chamber if he or she disagreed with or did not want to hear a speaker was a proper method to adopt. Magnificent candour of Sir Robert ! But what a pity hi« admission' did not go far enough to include this essential fact— that before the last ceremony he sought an interview with representative stud-ents and made to them this very suggestion, on which the students afterwards acted. When, in his next letter, Sir Robert reluctantly brings < himself to this further admission, if ha can do so much, let him cay whether his suggestion to the students meant that one *f them might leave the hall, bub not a couple of hundred. Ib is hard to be asked to insult Sir Robert's intelligence by supposing that hc^ meant anything so futile. But that is, apparenbly, what he now invitee us to do. Sir Robert has previously shown that when lie is left on tho field he regards that as convincing evidence of his victory, and ho has, if the truth must bo admitted, comported himself as a somewhat boastful victor. t But is he not, on this occasion, going a little too far when he claims to have effected a " stampede" of students? It seemed to mosb onlookers that the students retired without haste, .quietly, and in good order. Really, 1 think impartial history will scarcely award Sir Robert tho glory of having effected a stampede. If Sir Robert really felt iiurb by tho withdrawal of the students and really supposed that tho withdrawal had official approval, why did he not write to the Professorial Board? Thai "would only havo been hie duty: and would surely have been more manly " than the course ho followed. Bub perhaps in judging thus I do Sir Robert an injustice. 1 overlook the fact that he saw in this matter a means by which he might bo able to publicly discredit .and belittle the men who differ from him on important university questions and who nave the temerity to maintain thoir difference. Waiting, therefore, till now he recognises that at length he can make an opportunity. Heseizeß his petty grievance by its microscopic shoulders and drags it shamelessly into tho limelight. Ho doee not mention how ho has distorted the poor little thing. He bringa it on, he snys, to show that he had reason to expecb discourtesy from us. Happy Sir Roberb ! Our experience haa been less happy; for in the controversy on the reform question the conservative chief has publicly used s>o much discourtesy towards us that we are under no necessity to drag in a constructed sample from outside. — I am. etc., H. B. KIRK. [A letter from Sir Roberb Stoub is published on page 9 of this issue.]

The report presented to lho nnntut meeting of the Southland Acclimatisation Society stated that hawks havo been rapidly increasing in the district, and as their depredations were responsible for considerable mortality on Lho young of native ftnd imported game, the council of the society decided to give a royalty for their destruction. During the yeaf 5201 hoads were purchased at a, cost of £40 15s 3d. The society had also paid a royalty of 2s per head for shags for many years pasti and 305 heads wero purchased at a cost of £30 10s ; tho number on which royalty was paid during the proviour season was 266, and tho cost £26 10s.