E.—7a,

72

to work out a carefully considered policy for the maintenance and development of university teaching in the Metropolis. Experience has shown that a body made up of representatives of a number of different interests is incapable of formulating a united plan of action, and all the members of the new Senate should, therefore, as far as possible, be appointed for their personal qualifications as men of business knowledge and administrative capacity. With this end in view a large proportion of its members should be nominated by the Crown and not selected by other bodies."* We would draw special attention to these opinions in the light of the past history of the New Zealand University. The Senate has been the battle-ground of factions, and we have been assured by many witnesses that instead of the national interest being the first consideration, unfortunate compromises inimical to the national well-being have been made in order to reconcile provincial jealousies. But while we agree with the view just quoted, we cannot see how such a representative Council is to be formed in New Zealand. As a matter of fact, the Senate recommended by the London University Commission consists of fifteen members, of whom five are appointed by the Crown, two by the London County Council, one by the Corporation of the City of London, one is the Chancellor (elected for life by the Convocation), one the Vice-Chancellor (a paid officer appointed by the Senate), one the Chairman of Convocation, two persons are appointed by the University Court, and two are members of the Academic Council appointed by that body. This proposal provides, in a Senate of fifteen members, for eight members appointed by the Crown or by two great municipal bodies. The Governor-General in Council may conceivably be given the power to appoint a number of members to the new Council proposed, but there are no municipal bodies analogous to those existing in the London University area. On the whole, therefore, we are of opinion that there is no possibility of appointing a Council unless through the principle of representation . We recommend the formation of a Council or governing body of the University consisting of twenty-one members. Of these, one member shall be the Principal of the University, six members shall be appointed by the GovernorGeneral in Council as being persons of business knowledge, administrative capacity, and interest in higher education ; four members shall be appointed by the Councils of the University Colleges, one member by each Council; five members not being professors or teachers in the University shall be elected by members of Convocation by postal ballot; three members of the professorial staff of the University shall be nominated by the Academic Board ; one member shall be the person for the time being filling the office of Director of Education ; and one member shall be a person co-opted by the Council above constituted. The Council shall have the power to elect the Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor from among its members. The tenure of office of members of the Council should be five years, with the right to be reappointed or re-elected, as the case may be. The present practice of allowing members of the governing body to vote by proxy should not be continued. It will be noted that only one member of Council is proposed for each of the Constituent Colleges instead of two as at present. Only three representatives of the professorial staff are proposed instead of four as at present; instead of representation being given to each of the four distinct Professorial Boards, the nomination is to rest with the Academic Board, which represents the whole of New Zealand. Further, the representatives elected by the Convocation are to be elected by that body as a whole and not by the District Courts. j§| Our purpose in making these recommendations is to minimize so far as we can the operation of the provincial jealousies and strife which have in the past, we are convinced, operated prejudicially to the interests of the University. Under the proposed constitution of the Council only four members of a Council of twenty-one will directly represent a provincial interest. IP? We note that the Commission on the University of Wales comes to a similar conclusion in recommending the formation of the Council ': "In view of the recommendations we are about to make for giving greater freedom to the colleges in matters of teaching, it is important that the aim of its constitution should be to

Opinion confirmed by New Zealand experience.

Composition of Council suggested for London University.

Conditions not analogous in New Zealand.

Recommendation for composition of Council.

Proxies. Analysis of proposed membership.

Opinion of University of Wales Commission.

* University of London Commission Report, sec. 111, p. 49.