CORRESPONDENCE

Evening Post, Volume XC, Issue 89, 13 October 1915, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE

EXAMINATION OF SURVEYORS TO THE EDITOR. Sir, — As a member of the profession concerned, I was interested to see a day or two ago the published results of a recent examination for surveyors, and was struck by the extraordinarily large percentage of failures recorded. Some years ago, I remember that a somewhat similar result provoked an enquiry by one of the staff of a city journal as to the reason for such a sweeping result, and the secretary of the examining body replied that it was owing to the incompetence and lack of preparation of the candidates. No doubt, to a certain extent this is perfectly true, but when one s4es a result such as the last examination produced, in which out of a total of twenty-one only one candidate managed to pass the whole test, and of the remainder only four managed to complete the one or two subjects in which they previously failed, this appears to call for comment. Obviously, there are two explanations possible, either the great majority of the candidates are numskulls and incapable of passing a reasonable test, or the severity of the examination is out of all proportion to the professional requirements of a practising surveyor. I have seen the papers recently set, and I have no hesitation in saying that the second is the much more likely explanation, and I should personally be veryeorry to find myself dependent for my living upon my ability to accomplish what is required in the limited time allowed by the examiners. The conclusion one is forced to in view of the j facts and the growth of harassing and burdensome restrictions and regulations is that the examination has lost its original purpose of producing competent surveyors, and is now being used by the TeI sponsible body as a means of barring out numbers of men who would otherwise qualify. No doubt, I should be the last to object to such a condition, and cannot honestly say that I do, but a ring of this sort can be made too select, and when, as now is happening, the stifling of competition in the manner indicated above tends to deliver the public over to those fortunate enough to be in a position to demand their own terms, it is high time attention was called to it, especially as two other quasi-professional classes have recently obtained legislation enabling them to follow a precisely similar course. — I am, etc.. SURVEYOR. 9th October. [This matter was submitted for reply to the secretary of the New Zealand Examining Board. He stated that examinations for surveyors were conducted by the Federated Surveyors' Boards of Australia and New Zealand, seven in number, the papers being set by each in turn. At the recent examination, the papers were set by West Australia, and so far the results known in New Zealand were 21 candidates, 5 passed. In Sydney, of 19 sitting, 10 passed; and in Hobart, of 4 sitting, 2 passed, the percentages being thus better in Australia than in New Zealand. The recent papers were eminently practical as a Tule, but were perhaps somewhat long; and while an occasional faddist might sometimes interpolate a tricky question, he was never the examiner marking the results, and, consequently, in such a body o f men, the total result was probably not to be bettered very much. Surveyors were wanted at present, so many having gone to the front, and if any influence could have affected the examiners' deliberations this might have done so.] TREATMENT OF ALIENS TO THE EDITOR. Sir, — I -don't believe "Roderick Dhu" is a Scotchman. No Scotchman could be so illogical When dealing with the Germans, he says, in effect, it is not the German modern puling party alone who are responsible for German misdeeds, but also their humblest instruments^ and even those who may have been for thirty-seven years away from the country are to be dealt with by prussic ac^d. When he writes of Glencoe, he says none of the mean instruments are blameable, but only King William, the extent of whose blameworthiness was, until <your correspondent settled it, controversial, and Lord Stair. He even exempts Campbell of Badalbane and Campbell of Glenlyon. Surely Roderick is a sham Roderick! Now, my wish was to point out by inference that your correspondent was a degenerate to the extent that he, like some Germans, advocated poison. He resembled the Glenlyon-Glencoe party in that he advocated the abuse, though not from the same standpoint, of the rules of hospitality.. At the opening of the war there were with us, as in other countries on all such occasions, enemy subjects, some of whom were residents and others visitors, more or less temporary. The treatment accorded to these is different. The former have by custom and legislation, and in some cases by contracts, been invited to come and remain, and to acquire property, and carry on their avocations, without the necessity of naturalisation. Some of them have had their passages wholly or partly paid. Such, as a class, were the teachers of German and Austrian birth — Professor yon Zedlitz was in this class, and because he remained with us he lost his German citizenship, but had not acquired the British. International law, which, like most of our laws, has largely arisen from custom and judicial decision, is, to a considerable extent, founded on the laws of hospitality, and therefore is more binding on decent people than even statute law. By proclamation made in August, international rules bearing on such residents, being nothing more than the rules of hospitality, were confirmed by a solemn psomise made by His Majesty the King, this promise being given locally on the advice of the Ministry of this country. The case of Professor yon Zedlitz, and other cases, were dealt with with a view to deciding whether they ought to be interned or have the benefit of this proclamation, and the promise of peace and protection was extended specially to him, as well as others, by the Ministry, three of whom, namely, the Prime Minister and the Ministers for Internal Affairs and for Defence — and I say this, notwithstanding the Prime -Minister's statement that he only knew of a certain letter a week ago — have always known the whole of the correspondence, consequently this particular letter. Well, these Ministers, like the windmill that annoyed Don Quixote, have bent before the supposed-to-be-popular breeze, have abused the rules of hospitality, have repudiated Royal promises made on their own advice, and set aside a solemn agreement, which was as binding and enforceable as if made with any other citizen. No new circumstance has, notwithstanding the -Prime Minister's statement, come to the knowledge of the Ministry since the professor's case was considered. Can it be wondered at that men like the Eev. Mr. Gibson-Smith, and women like Mrs. Atkinson and Mi6s England, pleaded that such an indelible stain of dishonour should not be put upon the Dominion? The victims of Glencoe were protected by a Royal promise, and the failure to keep it is the charge which leaves a stain on those responsible. Your _cori-£3pondent, equally regardless of ,

Royal promises and the rules arising from the relationship of guests and hosts, wants to poison our guests, to whom we have made solemn promises. Now does he understand why I regard him as a descendant of one of the murderers, only worse — a poisoner, instead of a wielder of the claymore, but with the came murder in his heart? — I am, etc., T. W. .HJSLOP. 9th October, 1915. COMPULSORY SERVICE TO THE EDITOR. Sir, — I read your leader in to-night's issue entitled "Labour's Sturdy Answer" with much interest, and as a humble private in New Zealand's Forces I should like to congratulate Mr. M'Laren on bis brave words at the tramway social on Monday night. No doubt our Minister of Defence has sound reasons for being utterly opposed to conscription, but I hope I shall not forfeit my claim to be "humble" if I state a few personal facts. I resigned a position worth £260 per annum to join the forces, without any compensation, apart from my regimental pay of 5s per day My eister, who earns £75 per annum, and myself, are the sole support of our parents. Of course my case is ( not exceptional. I know other fellows to whom the call appealed even more strongly, inasmuch as they are financially worse off by the change than I am. For obvious reasons I did not feel a bit disheartened when a wiseacre told me the other day that I was a fool — that my own people should have come before my country ; but I was taken aback when a strapping young fellow with no ties and plenty of money told me he would rather be a live coward than a dead hero any day, and that he had no intention of enlisting unless compelled to do so. Fortunately these are not the people that our brothers in Gallipoli are fighting for. There are brave mothers and fathers and sisters that make it worth while, but is it fair that because a number of decent-minded self-sacrificing persons are still offering their services, we should adhere to tho injustices of the present system? People deplore the fact that war means the elimination of the fit and the strong. Must it also involve the elimination of the willing and the chivalrous? We are all compelled to pay rates and taxes — no one can shirk them — and I fail to see why anyone who can serve his country in this crisis should be allowed to shirk his responsibility. It is certain that & measure that would exact fair tribute from all — call it compulsory service or what you like — would meet with the approval of every- man in the ranks, of every parent or wife who has a son. or a husband at the front, and of every right-minded citizen. Labour has spoken in no uncertain voice. We want our Ministers to be bold, to put all prejudices, false sentiment, and precedent aside in this unprecedented struggle, and let New Zealand give the Empire a lead, as she has done before in other matters. — I am, etc., A SOLDIER. 12th October. HANDWRITING TO THE EDITOR. Sir, — In your Saturday's issue, Mr. H. L. James gives his opinions on certain extracts, kindly published by you, from a paper I read to the Wellington teachers. Mr. James evidently did not hear the paper, and makes no attempt " to piece out my imperfections with his thoughts." I want to assure him, therefore, that I as a teacher yield to no one in my appreciation of ideals, though I do draw the line at machine-printed ideals in the form of copybooks. . That was, however, only one oi my minor objections to their use. Mr. James scoffs at my plea for epeed. I did not advocate scribbling, however, in. any of its forms. Education is largely a matter of compromises, and my contention was that our absurd devotion' to "copperplate " was one of the reasons for the poor writing we hear so much about today. I cannot admit any sympathy with Mr. James in his claims for the artistic or moral value of handwriting. As an " end " in itself it is the most mechanical, unintellectual, and anti-educational subject on our syllabus. Surely Mr. James is somewhat behindhand in his reading of contemporary literature on the subject he so boldly discusses. Might I dare to refer him to Stanley Hall, Thorndyke, Professor Findlay, and, say, any modern psychologist? Hebrew and Latin literature is hardly to the point here ; in 'fact, Mt. James's Latin quotation was .ungenerous. WtS welcome discussion on this or any other educational problem, but just now you .have more pressing demands on your valuable space. Might I, therefore, invite Mr. James to the Training College, where we can thresh it out, if he likes, before either a public or an expert audience. If this does not suit him, then — " Sutor, ne supra crepidam." — I am, etc., J. S. TENNANT. 12th October. LETTERS IN BRIEF '' Munitions," commenting on the costly nature of the assaults on Gallipoli, suggests that victory must ultimately come from Russia. " The teeming millions of Russia," says the correspondent, " are pregnant with victory, but it needs munitions to bring it forth. Would not, then, a bold munitions policy be a more effective step towards victory, a more serious duty than the costly continuance of assaults on such a position ? We have a duty to perform. Facts and necessity point it out, and it is the sacrifice of wealth and the reinforcements of munitions and equipment of war rather than j the' less effective and more oratorically inspiring one of flesh 'and blood." "Patriot" writes: — It is pleasing to note that the cricket season will open with a benefit match in aid of our wounded soldiers. lam sure true lovers of the game will give the Cricket Association much credit for the decision. And I trust it will not be the last we shall hear of these generous actions for our soldiers." With the object of stimulating recruiting, "Pro Patria " writes suggesting that employers should give employment to Teturned troopers and married men in preference to single men. The correspondent says: — "Most of the large establishments in Australia have adopted this method of employing only men that are not physically fit, or married or elderly men. I also wish to point out that many married men cannot get employment, because single men are kept. If they were dismissed, some would forcibly drift towards the recruiting bureau. At the present time, I know of a father, who has three sons at the front, that cannot get work, on account of these young men that are employed." At the beginning of September Mr. F. T. Moore wrote to The Post in regard to the behaviour of soldiers on an Aucldand-bound . train by which he was a passenger. The correspondent stated that numbers of the men were drunk, that they misbehaved in a disgusting manner, fought one another, smashed windows of carriages, and stampeded refreshment rooms. Mr. Moore contended that such a deplorable lapse was proof that the matter of liquor, in respect to soldiers, needed courageous attention, and he urged that drastic reforms should be effected. Parliament, he wrote, should close all hotels at 6 p.m. while the war lasted, and refus« the sale of drink _to_ any soldier at any

time. The complainant declared that liquor interests had too much power over Parliament. Mr. Moore's statements were referred to the Railway and the Defence Departments. The Defence authorities replied that it was necessary to have first a report from the Railway Department. A representative of The Post endeavoured to obtain this Department's version of the soldiers' conduct, but various reasons were given for delay. The-expected report has yet to be seen, j