The College Sinecure.

Observer, Volume XI, Issue 753, 3 June 1893, Page 2

The College Sinecure.

The friends of Professor Aldis seem very determined that if they can only prevent it he shall not be deprived of his sinecure at the Auckland University College and the fat salary attached to it. Consequently, the most strenuous exertions are being put forward to influence the gentlemen constituting the Council, as well as public opinion, in the hope that the professor may be retained in big position. But these efforts are not likely to succeed. Sufficient has been made public already to convince anyone that such a large expenditure for the services of a professor of mathematics is not justtined, and that in the interests of the colony at large, some economy should be effected in this particular item of expenditure.

Even if the Auckland University College were a large and well-attended one, with good facilities for the training of students, the salary would be considerable. But as a matter of fact, it is little more than a college in name. True, it has the services of several very able professors, but the number of students who attend and the results attained are not by any means commensurate with the expenditure involved. As I have said before, this University iB a very costly toy, and the secondary education which it affords is secured at an enormous comparative cost.

But we are speaking of Professor Aldis. Several very peculiar arguments are urged in favour of his retention in his present position. Perhaps the|most extraordinary. is that he was entitled to expect that the appointment to- tbe Auckland College was for life. But why? As well might a teacher under the Board of Education or an officer in any of our public departments expect life appointments. Such a thing would be absurd. Then we are asked to think of his high scholarly attainments. Well, admitting they are very high, are they not beyond our means, and, if so, why seek to retain them ? - Besides, the mere faot of the possession of such talents is an argument that no great harm will be done to Professor Aldis by his dismissal, for he will be sure to get another good appointment elsewhere.

Another argument against the dismissal is that it would be a serious blow at the cause of University Education in New Zealand. But this is quite a mistake. Economy cannot injure any good cause. Much more severe is the blow that would be dealt by an extravagant system whose continuance was not justified by results, for it would create and intensify a feeling against secondary education of any kind by the State. The Auckland University College is part of an extravagant system. It is not worth a third of the money spent upon it, and its existence is due to mere provincial rivalry. - Cities in the South possess colleges and we mußt have one too, no matter what a poor and wretched thing it may be.

The agitation for the retention of Professor Alette's services is creditable to the good nature and kind-heartedness cf those concerned in it, but it is not in the interests of the colony at large. Of all the Professor's friends, is there one who sincerely thinks that his services last year were worth the £4 per hour he was paid ? Indeed, is there any other man in the colony, no matter what his duties or his capability for discharging them may be, who was paid anything like as much ? I

think not. And yet it is urged that the expenditure should ba continued— that for the sake of some thirty mathematical students this annual outlay of £800 should be incurred. It is preposterous.

It is very unfortunate that just at this, particular time, when the Professor's case is trembling in the balance, that Mrs Mary Steadman Aldiß should have chosen to rush into print with two letters, both of which are opposed to the interests of the people at large. One is a eulogy of a local shirtmaker for trying to shuffle out of the payment to hie girls of the wages prescribed by the law. The other is a defence of the principle of cheap labour and an appeal for the unrestricted admission of alien gumdiggers. Whatever sympathy existed for the Professor with the public at large has been wholly destroyed by these two ■ ill-advißed effusions.

.. It is easy for a woman whose husband draws £800 per annum from the taxpayers of the country to write letters eulogising the oppression of factory girls and the importation of cheap labour. But does she forget that the very arguments she uses are the most effective that can be employed against her own husband ? Why should the people pay £800 to the Aldises when they can get services of equal value for one-half the money? Indeed, why should the country be burdened at all with this enormous charge for the higher education of the children of well-to-do men ? It is time the taxpayers of the country insisted upon a practical answer to these questions.