The Lyttelton Times. FRIDAY, FEB. 7, 1879.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LI, Issue 5602, 7 February 1879, Page 4

The Lyttelton Times. FRIDAY, FEB. 7, 1879.

Wb have said that the University and Higher Education Commission has fallen; into a mistake when it decided that the public should be excluded from its meetings. We are quite aware that, we shall be supposed to-have formed this opinion from biassed motives, and that we shall bo told that in such a matter the public Press is not an impartial judge. As we propose to state the reasons which may be fairly urged on each side of the question in order that every one may as he thinks, right, form his own opinion, we may well afford to ignore that, preliminary and personal objection. If it were a question of personal feeling we can easily imagine that the Commissioners would ,be quite- as much biassed in favour of 'the conduct of their own proceedings in secret, os a public journal would bo in favour of publicity. In fact, to a newspaper the question, as. one of personal interest, is naturally one of indifference.. Commercially, we are afraid the reporting of the Commission would not be remunerative. Education is not as yet to the general public a subject of that thrilling interest which would be likely to gather rottnd our publishing office a orofrd, clamorous for second editions of the latest news respecting it from the’ office of the Royal Commission. And judging from the ‘‘potent, grave, and reverend signors ” of whom the Commission is composed, we cannot safely rely on the probability of sensationalism, in the proceedings.: to he reported, Heavenly minds,' we are-told, are;-not' unsusceptible of wrath, and professorial minds .cannot, we dare say, churn absolute; exemption from that failing; but its; expression would, we fear, be caviars to' the multitude.. Invective might take the line adopted by the late Daniel O’Connell, when he called an abusive- piscatorial female the rectangular hypothenuse of an impossible- parallelogram. However strange' it may appear, we feel assured that in-advocating publicity to the proceedings of the Commission the Press can easily do so on purely public grounds. The arguments on each side of the question may be shortly summarised. We state first those in-favour of secresy. The Commission, it is said is appointed by, the • Governor, and the Governor should be the first to ! know its proceedings and its views. The Commissioners can deliberate with much more freedom among themselves than in the presence of the public. They will not be so apt to make long speeches, or to lose time in mere debate, when no reporters are present, as when the winged 1 words are, as they fly, taken down and put into print. Witnesses are less likely to be reticent and ambiguous when they, know that their evidence will not appear until it has been revised by . themselves, and in its place among other evidence when the report is ultimately published in the shape of a ponderous blue-book. Premature inferences, and their public discussion, would, lead to inconvenience and embarrassment, and would create false conclusions. We think that we have fairly stated the reasons which would be publicly given on the side of secrecy of proceeding • though we fear that privately there lies concealed a sort of resentment against anything like the too familiar approach of the profane public to the holy ground on which Royal Commissions hold their solemn revels. If so, we regret the fact, for experience Of public life, more and more shows that while there are certainly exceptional cases in which publicity is prejudicial to public interests, the general rule may be taken to be that, except in such cases, the advantages of publicity predominate. Publicity tends to, correct and diminish the evils which it-creates. Secresy, on the other hand, tends to aggravate and multiply its evil consequences. But we turn to. the arguments on each side in this case; and we cannot better answer those which we have stated on the side of secresy than by stating those on the other side. At all events the whole case will be given, and the best means furnished of ensuring a just conclusion. The Oommission may be technically one to report to the Governor, but the essential object is to inform the public, and not His Excellency. It would not matter ranch if he never read the report, but it is of 'material moment that the public and their representatives should read, learn, and inwardly digest it. The best mode of attaining that object is to secure publicity from the first. Granting that publicity may make Commissioners a little too eloquent and the witnesses a little too reticent, though we have considerable doubt on the latter point in this case, the evil effect is infinitesimal if contrasted with the good effect of publicity in aiding the Com? mission to arrive at , wise and true conclusions. Shut up in a room, blind to public light and deaf to public sound, the wisest men will scarcely fail in their discussions, .to amve at wrong conclusions. At the best, they take a leap in the dark. Their best guide is the constant discussion which every question, as it arises, will create in every aspect and under every condition. Their talents would-be better used in discrimination than in self-evolution, Another great advantage would be that they would have the public with them as colleagues rather than as critics. In these times the questionable shapes which come, fully equipped, out of a blue-book; as out of the head of Jove, are not credited with the attributes of divine: wisdom. Wisdom is .now-a-days the aggregate work of millions of hands and hearts, faulty and feeble it may be, but only in that way to find general acceptance. It is not an import made to order, put it is the product of native industry. We do not want a mere blue-book, which few read and fewer understand. We want something which can be in the hands of every one as an effective instrument in advancing the cause of-public education. Unless public interest and public support continuously aid the Commissioners, their

labour will be bat labour in rain- 801 l up the atoue as.they may, it will nefer reach the „ summit. A* we pointed out the other day, there is another benefit which publicity would have ensured. The public would have had authentic and correct intelligence of what the Commissioners said and did. Bow that the regular channel of information is blocked up. irregular leaks wxßl occasionally be sprung, and it is onßy too probable that imperfect and incorrect accounts of what.-hai'really transposed will appear. * Mach more evil is likely to arise from those accounts than from the legitimate Sources of public information.