T. A. HUNTER.]

13

1.—13 a.

9. As a general rule I suppose the professors do not go far outside of their own notes?— 1 cannot give the general rule. 10. Supposing you have the four professors in the four colleges examining on one subject, would there not be an exchange between the students and a comparison of the notes I —lf your four professors are of that type, then all I can say is that you want four different professors. 11. You do not see any difficulty there?—l do see difficulties in the system of a conjoint Board, but as far as my judgment and actual experience go as a student and teacher in the institution my judgment is that that is the best solution at the present time. 12. Do you not think it is probably owing to the difficulty of getting experts in New Zealand outside the professors that the English examination was instituted —that was one of the reasons? — Judging from the report of the 1879 Commission, I should not say that was the case. I should say the external examination was instituted for the purpose of preventing the New Zealand University from teaching. In order to prevent it coming into competition with the Otago University it was made an examining body. 13. In one part of the pamphlet it says that the external examination was due to want of confidence in the professors?— lt is an interpretation of what we mean by "want of confidence." What we mean is want of confidence either in their competence or fairness. A previous question of yours suggests that want of confidence. 14. Have you not a distinct professor's examination? —Yes, as far as "terms" examinations are concerned. 15. That could riot indicate want of confidence in them? —Perhaps not: but professors cannot pass students for degrees. 16. Professor Sale did not object to the external examination?—l think the reason for that is the difference in the subjects taught. There are some subjects in which the external examination does not limit the freedom of the teacher as it does in other subjects. I suppose classics would be a subject of the former kind. 17. When you refer to the keeping of " terms," it is possible, is it not, for a student not to keep terms in a subject which he wants for a degree examination ?—Yes. 18. So that a professor could not keep a student back by "plucking" him?— That is so. Two colleges have tried to do this, but so far as we know there is no authority to enable them ti. carry out their regulation. 19. Mr. G. M. Thomson (to Professor Yon Zedlitz).] There is a statement on page 26—1 do not want tn press it too much —but you say then' thai " the legislation of 11)02, whicii reduced the number of professorial representatives on the Senate, is mainly attributable to the fact that in one or two cases professorial Senators had incurred the suspicion of having used their academic position to further private ends." Is there any evidence before you in making that statement, because we have our ideas on the subject?— Yes. You could call evidence mi that if you liked. It is ;i difficult thing, rather, to ask me to answer it. 20. I am asking you, because Professor Laby shunted this on to you?— Yes. I will say this : urn have access to Dr. Fitchett, who was, I believe, mainly responsible for the form of the legislation of 1902. He might say there was not a word of truth in it, but you might get an answer from him. It' you desire to press the point I could produce other evidence. I understand Professor Haslam, one of our colleagues in Christchurch, and who proposes to attend here if you wish t<i examine him, could give you details. I am not going to give tin' personal details, because they are not within my personal knowledge. In former times the unfortunate system prevailed of partial payment to the professors by fees. Men who advocated legislation calculated to increase their own classes would therefore lay themselves open to that suspicion. 21. Mr. Allen (to Professor Hunter).] You referred to the difficulties of a conjoint Board of Examiners. I would like to hear what they are?— The difficulty is in bringing together the men from the colleges. If you have a conjoint Board these men should come together and confer on the papers. It would not do to arrange the matter by w-riting —they must meet. 22. Practical examination, and oral? —I take it the Board would decide its own particular methods. At the present time the University spends a considerable amount of money in fees to the Home examiners, and fhat expenditure would be saved. We conceive that University examining is part of the professor's work, and all that the University would pay would be the actual expenses. 23. Do you think there would be any possibility of a professor favouring his own pupil?— I suppose there is that possibility. 24. Or probability?—l do not think there would lie any probability when you have four professors on the Board, and three men check what the other one does. If it happened that in one particular subject you had four unscrupulous men, what you suggest is probable. 25. (To Professor Yon Zedlitz) : Do you approve of fees as part payment of professors?— No. I think they are generally abandoned, on the whole. They are not abandoned in Germany. Ihe system partly exists in Germany, and it is known that in a few cases professors have made very large fortunes in that way; but there, I understand, the system is a tradition of great antiquity. It is felt to be a disadvantage. 25a. What disadvantage do you say it is yourself?— With regard to compulsory subjects, it is a difficult thing to ask a man who is receiving a certain number of fees to come forward and say, "I do not believe in compulsory subjects." Then, with regard to making the subject easy: The Xew Zealand student to a considerable extent likes to take a subject which is currently reported to be easy, and the professor examining him would be prone to make the subject easy and attract members to his class. In America there have been cases on record, even when the system of payment by fees has not been in existence, where the professors have been brought up sharply by their colleagues. It is a temptation to the professors to let their students through too easily, especially if they profit by the subject they teach. If the Professorial Hoard have any control of the examine-