LINCOLN AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE.

Otago Witness, Issue 3594, 30 January 1923, Page 14

LINCOLN AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE.

ADEQUACY OF THE TRAINING. INQUIRY TO BE MADE A good deal of the time of the University Senate on Wednesday was occupied with a discussion relative to the training of students in agriculture at Lincoln College. Sir Robert Stout moved:—“That if the scientific equipment in Lincoln School is inadequate for the training of graduates in agriculture this Senate is of opinion that it would be a waste of money to complete such equipment when the college in Christchurch can supply all that is requisite.” The motion w-as seconded by the Hon. J. A. Hanan. Professor Hunter moved as an amendment:—“That if the scientific equipment in Lincoln School is inadequate for the training of graduates in agriculture the Senate will withdraw- recognition.” He said there seemed to be an opinion that Lincoln College was not adequately equipped. If that were so the Senate should no longer continue its recognition of the college. The Chancellor remarked that for several years Lincoln College was part of Canterbury College, and students in agriculture got their higher scientific training at the latter college. It seemed to him that Professor Hunter had struck the right key in advocating that Lincoln College be compelled to link up with Canterbury College again. Professor Segar seconded the amendment. He said that some of the subjects in the degree of Bachelor of Agriculture were not taught in any of the schools. If they were to be taught at Canterbury College substantial additions would have to bp made to the staff there, and that would be a costly procedure. Sir Robert Stout said he understood that Canterbury College was w-illing to take over the work done at Lincoln College. They must conserve their funds if they wished to have efficiency in edtieation. They could not go on spending money as they had done last year. Mr Adams stated that some years ago a conference was held between the director of Lincoln College, one of the professors at Canterbury College, and the speaker to consider questions in connection with a school of agriculture at Canterbury College. From his recollection of the conference he knew that Canterbury College was prepared to meet Lincoln College as far as it possibly could in advanced science of agriculture and to give whatever instruction was necessary in securing any degrees that might he desired. The Rev. Dr Cameron expressed- the opinion that neither the motion nor the amendment dealt with the matter in a satisfactory w>ay. Neither proposal would lead to any finality on the matter. Jue thought the motion should contain some suggestions as to how they were going to solve the problem. It seemed to him that a commission should be set up to go into the question with the object of bringing up some recommendation. In his opinion a small commission should visit Lincoln and Canterbury Colleges, and report to the next meeting of the Senate. He would move—- “ That a commission be set up to visit Lincoln College and Canterbury University College and report on the provision made for scientific instruction in agriculture at Lincoln College.” This amendment was seconded by Professor Wall. Professor Thomas said it was evident that they wanted a careful inquiry into the question. Mr de la Mare said that if a commission was to be appointed he would prefer rhat a professor of agriculture be brought over

from Australia so that they might get a really expert report. At this stage Professor Hunter agreed to withdraw his amendment. Sir Robert Stout said the Senate had decided that the equipment at Lincoln was inadequate, so why should they defer the matter for another year. He thought the proper course to follow was to make Canterbury- College an agricultural college and throw the responsibility on the authorities of that institution. Professor Scott then moved:—“That, no report having been received from Lincoln College the authorities of that college be requested to furnish proofs that they are prepared to supply (he instruction called for in the syllabus of the course. Further, the Senate would suggest that the resources of Canterbury College should be made use of to attain this result.” The motion was seconded by Mr Bakewell. Sir Robert- Stout then agreed to withdraw his motion. Dr Cameron’s motion was carried by 12 votes to 11, and the question was referred to the Science, Agriculture, and Foresty Committee to enable it to make a recommendation regarding the members of the commission.