SELECTION OF OUR RHODES SCHOLARS

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 7318, 23 December 1910, Page 1

SELECTION OF OUR RHODES SCHOLARS

ARE THEY TOO OLD ? VIEWS OF THE CHANCELLOR, SIE EGBERT STOUT. REPT,Y TO PROFESSOR HASLAM. “It just shows how much be knows about it,” was the remark made by the Chancellor of the University, Sir Robeit Stout, when his attention was drawn to tho report in yesterday’s - “New Zealand Times” of the interview of Professor Haslani, of Christchurch, on the subject of the ago of the Dominion’s Rhodes scholars. Tho Professor was reported as having said that wc were oh ths wrong tuck in the selection of Ihe scholars, adding: “Wo arc sending much older men than the founder over meant to he considered. The men selected have been 22 or 23 years of age, just the age when they get no good out of their university associations in tlie Old Country. They aro not young enough to associate with tho undergraduates, nor old enough to ‘como down’ and be jolly with them. As a proof of that the trustees themselves have been complaining and expressing a desire to have younger men sent.” EMPHATIC DISSENT.

Sir Robert Stout entirely dissents from this view. “The position," lie said yesterday, “is that we are allowed by the regulations to send candidates up to twenty-five years of age. This year’s candidate* were all twenty-two years old, and sometimes the candidates have been below that age. On two, if not on three occasions, the men elected were actually under twenty-one. It has been found in South Africa that sending boys of the age that Processor Haslrun, suggests has been a great failure, for they have taken no position in the intellectual life of Oxford at all. This has now been recognised by the leading men among the trustees, who have come: to see that the position should he remedied. Wc cannot tell, as selectors, whether students of eighteen or nineteen are likely to he distinguished in their careers. * There. are some, no doubt, who develop 'more rapidly than others, but I have always thought that the age ought to bo such that the student must have done some University work." NOT TOO OLD AT 25., "It may be of interest to recall/' proj, ceeded the Chancellor, "that some time*; ago we had .a conference here with Hr. Perking,. who Js secretary, of the trustees. - Among those present ~ ;wcre representatives frbm the Government, representative, headmasters, inspectors of schools and professors, and the age that wo now have was agreed upon by the .majority of the delegates. All the trustees thoroughly apprpved of it, and ‘Dr. Perkins personally expressed . approval, and said, that even ‘twenty-five was not too old. We have not,- however, sent anybody of that age. But if wo are to elect schoolboys, it seems clear to me that it would be impossible to discover the more brilliant lads for these reasons;—(l) None of the schools have exactly the same programme of studies; (2) the test of examination at a secondary school is often insufficient to ascertain who are the .most able boys •intellectually; (3) it would be very difficult to get, candidates nominated ,so as to get any fair selection, for every secondary school would be sending in u candidate, and how could we- judge between them?

iWHAT TITE SCHOLARSHIPS MEAN. ' "Personally. I always, think-that the’ (meaning of the scholarships to Oxford is that the men gaining them ought to he able to enter into the intellectual .life of the University. If Mr Rhodes wanted to get good footballers, or even men of good character, and did not exalt, the intellectual life,- then I do not iunderstand what is the value of his* • scholarships at all. I understand that |he desired to benefit the best men all (round, intellectually, as well as phvsi-oallv and socially, so as to weld together such representatives of the British race for different parts of the earth. NO BIAS* AT ALL. "As for the statement I saw, made that there is any prejudice against Canterbury College-in the matter, that is simply absurd. The best candidate has always been selected, no matter where he came from. The personnel of the board of selection has often changed. On it we have had three different Governors, four different judges, andfour different professors, so that it is quite ridiculous to. .suggest that the board has any feeling against Canterbury. I believe that the selectors always aim* to get the best man, and am quite sure that there has never been any bias shown/' EXAMINATIONS IN GREEK. Reference was made by Professor Haslam to the examinations iu Greek. , “ I do not understand to what lie .refers/* said Sir Robert. "The early scholars were .required to pass iu Greek Respousions. They ail passed. I cannot ■understand, nowever, what is meant by say.ujy that some ot the scholars did not know Greek. They , ail passed. Greek is not . now mad© compulsory. It i<s true that some of the- /candidates in tlio early years were better equipped in Greek "than others, but in selecting a candidate all that the selectors had to do was to sec that they were able to pass ■in Greek when called upon to do so. and they all did so."