Chapter Five College Life, 1893--1919

Staffand Studies

FTER the departure of the redoubtable Posnett, classics and English continued A their unfortunate history of appointing good men only to lose them. Out of 120 applicants, six were interviewed in London by Francis Dillon Bell and Or John Percival, Headmaster of Rugby, who had helped to draw up the short list. They recommended a brilliant young man of twenty-six, Charles A. M. Pond. He had passed in both parts of the classical tripes at Cambridge with first class honours­ and in the year between these exams had also gained a first in classics at London University. In 1890 he had been awarded the first Studentship from the Prendergast Foundation to continue his classical studies in Vienna, and was at the same time elected a Fellow of St Johns after submitting a dissertation on ancient law. He had been working on Greek inscriptions in Crete as well as on better known sources from Greece. He was widely read in English and German literature as well as in the classics. He was 'a small man with a square powerful head, and looking very straight ...thr ough large round glasses ...good nature and benevolence ... beamed in his face .. . .'1 He was at once active in Auckland intellectual circles, becoming President of the Auckland Institute in 1893 and Chairman of the Professorial Board. But in that year he developed Bright's disease, which the Star at­ tributed to 'an over-indulgence in athletic sports',2 and died quite soon. He left to the College library a fine collection of over 1,000 books. Before coming to Auckland, Pond had got in touch with Posnett in Dublin. Coun­ cil now decided to do what Posnett had requested, and separate the two chairs. Aldis's mathematics chair was advertised at the same time. Even though Council had

75 A HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND

reduced the salaries from £700 to £500 for classics and mathematics and £400 plus fees for English (in other words, had divided £1,400 into three instead of two) there were 130 applicants for the three chairs. Mainly on the recommendation of Tucker, the classicist who had gone to Melbourne from Auckland, the London committee recommended, and Council accepted, rhe appointment of Henry Arnold T ubbs, an Englishman who had for three years been lecturer in classics at Melbourne. Tucker said that he was 'a first rare Oxford scholar of the thorough and practical type'. At Oxford, where he was awarded first-class honours in both parts of the degree, he won the Craven fellowship and the Arnold prize. Tucker described him as 'robust' and 'without "crotchets" to impede his usefulness'. He was secretary of University Exten­ sion in Melbourne and was a very popular lecturer. He was, Tucker wrote, 'a very pattern of conscientiousness & regularity' in performing his duties; besides, he had 'that manly adaptability which is requisite in dealing with colonial circumstances'. It was unlikely, he assured O'Rorke, that as good a man could be recruited in England for 'in consequence of events in Auckland' and in some Australian universities, colonial appointments were in 'temporary disfavour' with English scholars.3 The New Zealand Graphic and Ladies ]ottrnal decided to be witty about the appointment: the College, it said, had decided to wash its dirty linen at home and was 'importing Tubbs for the purpose'.4 T ubbs proved as popular with students in Auckland as in Melbourne. He was a dapper little man, elegant in dress, a bundle of restless energy. Unfortunately he was not only 'highly strung' but also mentally unstable. In 1896, while visiting Sydney in order to marry, he tried to commit suicide in newsworthy circumstances.5 He resigned his chair but was, it seems, prevailed upon by the students to stay on. A large meeting of graduates and undergraduates resolved to ask Council to allow him to withdraw his resignation, since he was regarded as a fr iend as well as an out­ standing teacher.6 He was given three months' leave. Talbot-Tubbs (for some reason he changed his name in 1896) continued teaching for another ten years, but by 1905 his illness had recurred and he was given leave then; and again in 1907.7 Some bizarre telegrams to O'Rorke show that he was in a very disturbed state. Council decided, because of the recurrent nature of his illness, to ask him to resign after his three months' leave. Talbot-Tubbs threatened to sue fo r £10,000, and did indeed sue fo r damages of £700-a year's salary and fees. The Supreme Court fo und in his fa vour in a preliminary hearing on the question of whether Council had in fact extended his term and hence could not dismiss him without a year's notice. Eventually he settled out of court for £250 plus £10 !Os to his counsel.8 While his mental instability presented his employer, the College Council, with a difficult problem, it seems today that Council acted harshly in demanding his immediate resignation. His lawyers wrote to Council complaining of its 'somewhat arbitrary act', in view of the professor's long service and his popularity with students, and it is difficult not to agree.9 It is not known what happened to Talbot-Tubbs thereafter. One of his students, Christina Gray, wrote that this 'much beloved' teacher had 'retired some said to the gum fields-we did not know'. 10 The gumfields were reputedly the last resort of alcoholics and failures. Talbor-Tubh's successor, H. S. Dettm ann, an Australian, was appointed after advertisement in Great Britain and Australasia. He had graduated B.A. from

76 COLLEGE LIFE: STAFF AND STUDIES

Sydney, and then gone to Balliol College, where he gained a 'first' in his B.A. degree and also graduated as a Bachelor of Civil Law. He proved an extremely popular and witty lecturer, noted for his 'racy Australian translations of Plautus and Terence, of Horace and juvenal'. He described a col­ league as 'a person always on the point of scintillating'. ln his room hung portraits of 'the great men of Balliol'. 11 The first Professor of English Language and Literature, Charles William Egerton, was appointed with Tubbs. He was another graduate of T rinity College, Dublin. He had been Senior Moderator and Gold Medallist in 1885 and was the Vice-Chancellor's Prizeman in English prose and composition. In 1890 he had edited an edition of Swift's Battle of the Books. He had a powerful set of referees, including Edward Dowden and A. C. Bradley. A copy of the Articles of Agreement which he signed has survived. A post-Aldis document, they provided that there should be no obligation on either party H. S. Dectmann, Professor of Classics to continue the engagement after the initial fi ve years. Egerton was 'a slight, active man with very bright kindly eyes'. His glasses 'seemed to increase their size and brightness' so that he always reminded one student of <1 bird. Another thought him like a koala bear. His better students, who included Kenneth Sisam, the Anglo-Saxon scholar, Mary Scott, a future novelist, and Frank Taylor, later an Oxford don, fo und him very he1pful,12 but there were many com­ plaints about his teaching. He was a boring lecturer. In 1899 the Students' Associa­ tion polled his past nnd present students. Of junior students, eighteen were satisfied with his lectures and seven dissatisfied; of the seniors, nine were satisfied and fi ve dissatisfied.The complaints, mainly about ill-prepared and ill-arranged lectures, were fo rwarded to Council. He was told that Council expected an improvement, or he might not be re-engaged.13 The English classes were the largest of any university department in the country-197 were attending by 1912.14 In 1910 Egerton was given the first assistant lecturer at the College, the new Rhodes scholar, Kenneth Sisam. He was succeeded a couple of months later by Phi lip ('Pip') Ardern, an Auckland graduate who had since then graduated with honours at Oxford University.He came of a Plymouth Brethren fa mily but, while at Oxford , was attracted by the High Church movement, in con­ trast to the austere and priestless worship of the Brethren. He was in a street pro­ cession which was attacked by rabid Kensitites (anti-ritualist extremists) and was struck by a stave. This was just before his fi nals in which, contrary to his teacher's expectations, he was awarded only a second. 15 In his first year he had won the Skeat prize. At Auckland he was called 'Professor's Assistanr'-on a salary of £100.

77 A HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND

In 1914 J. V. Wilson, later a member of the Secretariat of the League of Nations and later still a prominent New Zealand diplomat, became the first assistant lecturer in classics. Dettmann introduced him to his first class by saying, 'You must not be afraid of Mr Wilson because he is not afraid of you.' He was suc­ ceeded by Norman Sinclair, later an English public school teacher. After A. R. Johnson withdrew his candi­ dature fo r the mathematics chair, on hearing of the Aldis affair, it was offered to Hugh W. Segar, who was then at Trinity College, Cambridge. Segar had been a brilliant stu­ dent. At sixteen he was top of Great Britain in pure and applied mathematics and science in the Cambridge Senior Local Examina­ tions. At Cambridge he was the second Wrangler and, like Aldis, had won the Smith's prize, which enabled him to do research. In later years his work would have led to a doctorate, but there was none at AUCKLAND INSTITUTE ANO MUSEUM Cambridge in those days. However, he )oseph Wladislas Edmond published sixteen papers in English journals Potocki de Montalk before coming to New Zealand, which was an impressive record. Segar spoke in a monotone, which made his classes drowsy in lectures-maths was still a compulsory subject. 'His manner was outwardly cold, but in reality he was a most kindly man', one student recalled. Another, who thought him an excellent teacher, conceded that he was 'reserved almost to a fault: with a manner so quiet as to impress some people as being shy.' His reputation as a teacher is supported by the fact thm his students won the senior scholarship in mathematics, sometimes in both pure and applied mathematics, ten times in the years 1897-1913, which was a fine achieve­ ment. Segar was an ardent supporter of the Rugby club. He also was one of the strongest fighters for College interests during the 'site row', when the older professors did almost nothing. Although it would be difficult to prove, except in the case of classics, it does seem thnt the calibre of these new appointments to chairs was less impressive than that of the original professors. If so, that may have been due to the lowered salaries, which certainly depressed staffmorale: no one likes to think that he or she is valued lightly. A decade later Segar was asking Council to raise his salary to £600; the professor at Canterbury earned £900 plus fees, the man at Otago £600 plus fees, and Maclaurin at Victoria £700.16 A penurious Council was obliged to try to run a College on the cheap, with results unfortunate for scholarly standards. This is most clear in the case of three appoint­ ments of lecturers who were allowed to subsidize the College's pittance by private

78 COLLEGE LIFE: STAFF AND STUDIES coaching, just as the lecturer in music was partly supported by the Choral Society. In 1894 Council decided that it could afford to spend £50 a year fo r a lectureship in French, which was offered to Joseph Wladislas Edmond Potocki de Montalk, B. es L. (Bachelor of Letters), Paris. He was the son of a Polish aristocrat: one of his sons was later a claimant to the Polish throne. De Montalk had been born in Paris in 1836 and had fo ught in Garibaldi's army in 1859, when he was awarded several decorations. He had migrated to New Zealand, where he became a school-teacher in the South Island. In Auckland he did private coaching in French, German, and Italian. At the College he taught both French and German and was called the Lecturer in Modern Languages. One of his students, Frederick Sinclaire, who was Professor of English at Canter­ bury, recalled in 1933 that de Montalk was 'a very courteous and lovable old gentleman', who had kept 'his dignity, and his gentleness and gaiety' through many years of exile. His command of English was imperfect, so that 'les marts' were always 'the deads'.17 In 1901 de Montalk died and a year later Maxwell Walker was appointed for one year to teach French and German for £100. He graduated M.A. with honours in Latin and French at Auckland in the same year. He had been a school-teacher for several years. He was reappointed at the College annually until in 1908 he was given a year's leave, which he spent at the Sorbonne. He supplied The Kiwi with some tasteless travel notes: 'Lying seems to be a religion with all the black races I have met so far.'18 In 1909 Council decided to raise his salary to £300. J. A. Tale, a lawyer and fo rmer Minister of Justice, then moved that his status be raised to professor. Both O'Rorke and G. L. Peacocke voted against this, but it was carried. Professor Arthur Jarman, the mining engineer, moved on the Professorial Board that a protest should be sent to Council about this procedure, but his motion was lost. So the College had now created a professorship for £300 and filled it without advertisement and without receiving academic advice! Walker was permitted to continue his private coaching.19 Even more striking and in the end unfortunate for the College's reputation was the appointment in 1905 of the fi rst lecturer in economics, history, commercial geography, and, eventually, in mental science, a mixture of logic, ethics, and psychology, Joseph Penfound Grossmann. Such a range of subjects was not unique; at Wisconsin there had been a professor of constitutional law, economics, and morality and another man who had professed Latin, political economy, and logic. The Florida State College had once had a professor of agriculture, horticulture, and Grcck.20 Nevertheless, Grossmann's claims as a polymath must he hard to beat. Grossmann was born in Australia, the son of a Polish Jewish immigrant and an English mother. He had graduated at Canterbury College, with first-class honours in English and Latin, and in political science (including economics and history and jurisprudence) and second-class honours in mental science. He was the only New Zealand graduate with triple honours. From 1896 to 1898 he had taught political economy at the Canterbury College, while teaching for some years at the Boys' High School. In 1898 he was prosecuted on fo ur charges of forgery. He had been losing money speculating in shares and had borrowed from a money-lender, giving him as security two promissory notes on which he had fo rged the signature of a friend, the Canterbury Professor of Classics, F. W. Haslam, who narrowly escaped bankruptcy.

79 A HISTORY OF THE UNIVE RSITY OF AUCKLAND

He had advanced £750 to Grossmann and guaranteed a larger amount. Another court case brought to light two fu rther fo rged promissory notes. Strenuous efforts were made by Grossmann's friends to prevent prosecution. He and his wife had helped to found the Canterbury Women's Institute. A group of ladies made a canvass on his behalf and raised £800, but to no avail. Grossmann was sentenced to two years in prison. 21 He presently went to Auckland and wrote for rhe Star as well as coaching university students in various subjects. Grossmann was a remarkable man. He had been first president of the Students' Association at Canterbury and a prominent rugby player. He was for many years one of the best tennis players in Auckland. He was very good looking. He had quite extraordinary charm, and a magnetic personality. He was extremely widely read, with a very retentive memory. But he had a tragic life. His wife was Edith Searle Grossmann, an early New Zealand novelist and feminist. They had a mentally retarded child whom his wife took to England for treatment. She herself became insane. His application fo r the lectureship was itself unusual-it included three testimonials from groups of students about his ability as a teacher. His academic references pre­ dated his imprisonment. The great Macmillan Brown testified to his 'shrewd insight into character'; F. W. Haslam, the Canterbury classicist (whose name he was busily fo rging), had at that time fo und him 'high minded'. It is clear, however, that despite his cleverness and his varied abilities he was a journalist and coach, a man of very wide reading but with no pretensions to serious scholarship. He was to continue his journalism, writing innumerable Star editorials, throughout his long years in Auckland. In 1907 Grossmann was made lecturer in currency and banking, in addition to his other work, with a seat on the Professorial Board.22 His academic standards were flex­ ible. In 1911 he recommended that a student with a second-class pass in the College exams in economics should receive the annual 'premium' (that is, prize). The Board had refused to accept this. Grossmann now put in a second report giving him a first­ class pass. The Board refused to accept this too and Council asked for an explanation. Grossmann wrote, with engaging candour, that the arrangement of students in three classes was purely arbitrary, there being no fixed standards from year to year, even with the same examiner, nor subject to subject.23 He was not highly regarded by his more scholarly colleagues: Maxwell Walker, however, taught with him in the School of Commerce and graduated in Commerce himself. In 1915 ]. A. Tole moved at Council that in order to conserve funds and to get the services of a thoroughly competent local man, Grossmann should be elevated to a chair of history and economics. Another Councillor, T. U. Wells, demurred. The two professors, Segar and Egerton, tried to refer the appointment to a committee, but it was approved, and Grossmann became a professor on £700.14 He continued to lecture in mental science as well as in the subjects which he professed. Fortunately the College received fresh intellectual stimulus just before World War I. Professors F. D. Brown and A. P. W. Thomas, the two original scientists, both retired in 1913. Each was appointed a Professor Emeritus, the first occasion that Council had conferred that honour. Council now advertised chairs, at £700 each, in chemistry, in physics, and in botany, biology and zoology, hut with special qualifications fo r teaching botany. This emphasis was given at the suggestion of the three professors of

80 Professors and lecwrers, 1907. BACK ROW, FROM LEFT: Maxwell Walker (modern languages), H. D. Bamford (la-w), H. A. E. Milnes (education), F. P. Worley (chemistry), }. P. Grossmann (mental science, economics, histoT)', commercial geography), H. H. Hunt (accountancy), A. }annan (mining engineering); FRONT ROW: H. W. Segar (mathematics), C. \XI. Egercon (English), A. P. W. Thomas (biology, geolog)'), W. E. Thomas (music). biology in the southern Colleges, who wrote to the Auckland College pointing out that they were all zoologists, and that although they taught botany as well, none of the Colleges had a specialist botanist. This was a rare example of co-operation between the Colleges.Z5 In addition, Council established a lectureship in geology. Professor Ernest Rutherford, Professor H. E. Armstrong, and Professor Arthur Dendy joined the High Commissioner, W. P. Reeves, in selecting the appointees from the numerous applicants for the chairs. For physics they recommended a Welshman, Gwilym Owen, and he was appointed. Ernest Rutherford described him as 'a keen and good experimenter'. He used to go to Wellington in the vacations to work with Ernest Marsden, the physicist at Victoria. Owen kept in his lodgings an enormous picture of Lloyd George, whose name he could nor pronounce without emorion.26 D. C. H. Florance, who later went to the Victoria College, was placed second. In 1916 Owen joined the army and he resigned in 1919, when he was appointed to the chair at Aberystwyth. For chemistry the London committee recommended an Auckland graduate, Fredcrick P. Worlcy. He was strongly supported by Armstrong, who had supervised his D.Sc. research at the Imperial College of Science and Technology, in London, which had awarded him one of its most valuable research fe llowships for four years. He had proved a most assiduous and ingenious research worker, and had done 'work of first rate importance', as well as proving an excellent teacher.

81 A HISTORY OF THE UNIVE RSITY OF AU CKLAND

With the arrival of Worley in 1914, the College now had three of its own graduates on the staff, Worley, Ardern, and Walker, as well as the Canterbury graduate, Grossmann. Where the New Zealanders had pursued their studies adequately abroad, as Worley and Ardern had, they proved valuable appointments, but this was not to be the case with Walker and Grossmann, who had not. There is no doubt of the latter's intellectual ability, but neither he nor Walker established high scholarly standards in their departments. It seems fa ir to infer, what might in any case be guessed, that usually the local College graduate needed to be exposed to the com­ petition and standards of great universities, as well as to the experience of living in one or more of the world's large cities, in order to become a valued staff member. Since fe w New Zealanders did so before World War II, the Colleges necessarily remained colonial, with their professors recruited in the main from Oxford, Cambridge, or other British universities. It is fair to add, however, that the New Zealand geologist, Bartrum, who had not studied abroad, was to prove a good appointment. For the Chair in botany, out of some excellent applicants, the committee recommended a young man, John C. Johnson (later he changed his name to Sperrin­ Johnson), who had a brilliant undergradu:1te record. He was primarily an economic botanist, but had training and teaching experience in anatomy, physiology, and zoology. He had the degrees of M.B., B.Ch. as well as M.A. and M.Sc. from the National University of Ireland, and a Cambridge B.A. Dendy thought that if he chose to specialize in New Zealand botany he should attain great eminence.27 He fa iled to do either. John A. Bartrum was appointed to the geology lectureship. He had graduated M.Sc. with first-class honours at Otago in 1908, and had already published several papers on New Zealand geology. The fi rst lecturer in education was an Englishman, Herbert A. E. Milnes, who was appointed principal of the Auckland Training College in 1905. The College appointed him as lecturer a year later. He delivered his lectures in the Training College in Wellesley Street, near the College. ln 1915 he tried to organize a New Zealand University battalion, which would have been a good way of wiping out most of the graduates and students. He was himself killed in action in Flanders in 1917. The intellectual life of the New Zealand University Colleges was not usually rigorous and could be enervating. The first historian of the University of New Zealand pointed out that of eight really first-rate men on their early staffs, all but three left the Colleges and in most cases the country. 28 As has been seen, the classicist, Tucker, for example, had gone to Melbourne fr om Auckland. Auckland's most brilliant early student, R. C. Maclaurin, returned to New Zealand as Professor of Law at Victoria but after eight years went off to Columbia University as Professor of Mathematical Physics! Soon he became president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which he built up into a famous university. The Colleges were almost purely teaching institutions; not centres of research. Scarcely any of the leading research workers in the country were on the university staffs. T. L. Buick, the historian, was a journalist; the original workers in ethnology were public servants like S. P. Smith or Elsdon Best or Edward Tregear. In geology, Julius von Haast was at the Canterbury College; F. W. Hutton was at Otago; but James Hector was Director of the Geological Survey. It was possible to do significant

82 COLLEGE LIFE: STAFF AND STUDIES

original research in zoology or botany, but of the academics only H. B. Kirk, of Victoria, made any useful contribution. A. P. W. Thomas became Auckland's leading daffodil grower instead. Thomas published his pamphlet on Tarawera and Grossmann a pamphlet, Afforestation, on the profits to be made from planting /Jinus insignis and eucalyptus. In 1911 the government published an analysis of the articles in the Transactions of the New Zealand /nsciwte, which showed what scientific research work had been published in New Zealand. Seventy-two per cent of the articles were written by peo­ ple without university degrees. The authors included F. W. Hutton, Thomas Kirk, T. F. Cheeseman, Leonard Cockayne, and other leading scientists. Only four per cent were written by professors, only nine per cent by New Zealand graduates. 29 At the College at Auckland, although there were some successful teachers, there were no staff researchers at all before World War I, although a few science students did carry out successful research . The professors defended themselves then and later by saying, quite truthfully, that they had very heavy teaching loads. In 1919 Grossmann was lecturing fo urteen hours a week, and in several subjects-a quite excessive load if serious preparation was expected. Egerton was giving twelve lectures a week; Dettmann ten; Segar twelve.30 With such a burden they probably felt no particular need to be defensive about research. A Canterbury professor said quite simply that research was impossible when a department consisted of one professor and an assistant. 31 In any case, it was not generally thought, in England any more than in the Colony, that original investigation was a university function. It was assumed that there was a set body of knowledge, to be learned. The Colleges were thought of as teaching institutions, pass­ ing on this knowledge. There was, of course, nothing unusual about this attitude. Such had been the assumption when the early American colleges were established; the German emphasis on research fo und institutional recognition in the U.S.A. only with the establishment of}ohns Hopkins in 1876. Nor, in Great Britain, was research always fe lt to be the job of university teachers; neither Darwin nor John Stuart Mill nor Ricardo were academics. 32 The knowledge that was to be transmitted in the New Zealand Colleges was Euro­ centred, and not merely in languages, literature, or history. In botany and zoology the textbooks were English and the species studied were generally European. In 1898 T. ]. Parker and W. A. Haswell's book, A Textbook of Zoology, was published in London . Parker was a professor at Otago and Haswell at Sydney. It included some Australian examples and, of course, many genera and species which were world-wide, but it was not Australasian in emphasis. As we have seen, a very high proportion of university students were Teachers' College students or became teachers. By 1893 fifty-three per cent of University of New Zealand graduates were teachers. Of 114 Auckland graduates in 1901, fo rty­ eight were teachers, twelve were clergy, and ten were lawyers. 33 In the arts and science faculties what was needed wns nor a specialized but a general degree, which was what the six-subject B.A. of 1886 provided-'a teacher's not a scholar's degree'. In 1905 students were allowed to 'repeat' a subject, in other words take it to a higher level, like the later 'Stage ll' units; in 1914 they were permitted to advance two sub­ jects. In 1907 a new B.Sc. degree which included one year's research was introduced,

83 A HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND but it failed to anract students and was suspended in 1909. Two other changes should be noted. Mathematic1' ceased to he compulsory for the B.A. in 1911 and Latin in 1917.34 Examination papers give some idea of the scope and level of the students' work. Both the College and University of New Zealand examination papers in a few sub­ jects in two years chosen at random, 1899 and 1912, were submitted to a few of the present Auckland University staff for comment. Some of the responses were very interesting. In law, for example, the 1899 local paper, set by Or McArthur, the part­ time lecturer, was 'nn extr

84 COLLEGE LIFE: STAFF AND STUDIES

there was much emphasis on definitions of a dilemma, enthymeme, inference, deduction, induction, and so on. lt seems, again, that there was more rote learning than in recent years. Some subjects have changed in other ways, not by sub-dividing but by acquiring new areas of interest, not necessarily more difficult fo r students. For instance, the Euclidean geometry has been discarded from mathematics and replaced by calculus and 'new mathematics'. Similarly, much of the physics of 1912, such as thermometry, calorimetry, and electrolytes, has been discarded from the syllabus. In biology new special areas of study have arisen, to occupy much of the syllabus-for instance, genetics, behaviour, and molecular biology. The biology papers stressed structure, which still has to be learnt today. Arthur Dendy, the zoology examiner in 1912, asked 'a timeless question': 'What do you regard as the true object of zoological classification? Discuss the principles upon which such classification should be based.' But some questions invited superficial answers. For instance in 1899 A. P. W. Thomas invited students to 'give an account of the structure of Hydra' and to compare it with higher animals such as the frog. A modern zoologist comments that the question demanded a knowledge of structure only, for the comparisons would almost certainly be trivial; no really important evolutionary trends could be discussed when dealing with such disparate organisms. A mathematician comments that the general standard in 1912 was about that expected in the sixth or seventh fo rm today. A physicist thinks that the level was about that of modern entrance scholarship or first-year physics. The best students were, of course, as good as those today, but it seems fair to conclude that less was expected of them; in other words, that the standards of 1899-1912 were lower than those of today. This was in part a result of the fact that students need not 'advance' a subject beyond the first-year level, and could not, except fo r the extra 'honours' year, advance a subject beyond a second year's study.

The lecturers often tried hard and some, like Grossmann, were outstanding in that respect, but in a tradition of oratory, rhetoric, or declamation, with set speeches on topics such as 'Machiavelli'. It is possible, in a grandiloquent style, to sound im­ pressive, portentous, while conveying very little, if any, exact knowledge or providing any serious intellectual analysis or discussion. Former students testified, however, that Grossmann could inspire them to a love of history. There were no tutorials-which remained generally true until after World War ll. In English, Egerton set two or three essays a term, which he and Ardern marked-a fo rmidable amount of marking. Occasionally pass students were asked to bring their essays in for discussion, while advanced students brought in every exercise. Many students, however, like Ormond Burton, never heard any discussion at all. Most of the pro­ fe ssors simply read their lectures and the students wrote notes as fast as they could.35 A student of 1909 wrote that students with entrance scholarships were already at B.A. level, so that the lectures were simply revision. 36 In 1912 the College library consisted of a mere 5,535 books. Canterbury's was even smaller. Otago had 5,196 books, which were 'covered in with wire netting and fo rbid­ den to students except after application to the registrar fo r a key.' The newest Col­ lege, Victoria, had the largest collection of books, 8,770. The Auckland University

85 At:CKLA"O PU8llt: l.lf\RARV TOP Research, or even study in depth, was Impossible with the meagre collection of books: the College library, 1901. BOTTOM le is po�siblc char rhe laboruwries uc Auckland were rather more adequate for unclergrad1wte work than the library: Professor Thomas's biology laboratory, /899

86 COLLEGE LIFE: STAFF AND STUDIES

College took only twenty-five periodicals; Canterbury took even fe wer, fifteen; Victoria took fifty-one and Otago about sixty-nine, including numerous medical journals.37 The Auckland Council spent only £120 a year on books. Much of the student's work was based solely on textbooks plus lecture notes. Research, or even the study in depth of literary or historical topics, was impossible in these circumstances. The staff could not discover what had been done or was being done in their own fi elds. It is possible that the laboratories at Auckland were rather more adequate for undergraduate work than the library; certainly this was true in the years after the First World War. But as early as 1901 an Auckland graduate, and later a headmaster of Auckland Grammar and a College Council member, H. ]. D. Mahon, claimed in an article on the College that its labs were 'immeasurably superior' to those in the southern colleges. 38 He was able to boast of a remarkable run of Auckland successes, in the years since 1896, in winning the Senior Scholarships in chemistry and geology and occasionally in mathematics and botany. The College's pride was the success of its students in winning the only postgraduate award (before the Rhodes and postgraduate scholarships were introduced) fo r work in British universities. The Exhibition 1851 Science Scholarships were awarded to honours graduates in science who submitted a piece of original research to English examiners. Aucklanders won three of the first six awards in the years 1892-1902. Two presented papers based on research in chemistry and one in geology. In addition, in 1894 ]. S. Maclaurin (a chemist) declined the award, which then went to Ernest Rutherford of Canterbury College. Maclaurin was later awarded a O.Sc. for his research on the cyanide process of gold extraction. Of the University Senior Scholarships, which were awarded after special examin­ ations, Auckland students were winning about a quarter in the early part of the twentieth century. This was a reasonable proportion as the fo ur Colleges were all about the same size-just over 300 students attending lectures in 1906 and over 400 in 1909. By 1910 Auckland had the largest roll, 483 students, and was to continue to do so in most years, but the differences were not great. In 1913, for example, there were 581 students at Auckland, 566 at Otago, 421 at Canterbury, and 463 at Victoria.39 The scholarly and scientific education of the best entrants at Auckland was possibly superior to that in the southern colleges, because of the growing success of Auckland students at winning Junior (Entrance) Scholarships. From 1903 onwards over twenty per cent of these were being won in Auckland, mainly by boys at the Grammar School. All in all, however, it seems that the standard of teaching and the students' work was about the same in Auckland as at the other Colleges. Nevertheless, there were respects in which the Auckland College was at a dis­ advantage. It had neither a permanent site nor any 'permanent' buildings, nor even buildings built specifically fo r university purposes. Its income, £10,158 in 1910, was slightly higher than Victoria's and far below Canterbury's £15,302 or Otago's £18,387. It also had the smallest staff-which clearly was the responsibility, and indeed fa ult, of its Council. Otago's lead was mainly due to its medical staff, but Auckland had fallen behind the other three colleges even in numbers of arts and science staff:

87 A HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND

Teaching Staffs of the University Colleges (191 1-12)

(P = Professors; L = Assistant Professors, lecrurers, chief demonstratOrs;

D = Assistant lecturers, demonstrators, etc.) Auckland Victoria Canterbury Otago

p L 0 p L 0 p L 0 p L 0

Arts 3 3 4 2 2 4 2 2 5 3

Science 3 2 4 5 4 3 2 5

Commerce

Law 2 2

Education

Total 6 8 10 5 8 8 9 2 8 8 5

Total (including Special Schools) 8 11 - 10 5 8 9 14 6 20 14 1t

These and other weaknesses and shortcomings were publicized and criticized dur­ ing the years of the university reform movement, 1909-14. There had always been some dissatisfaction with the University of New Zealand: it was not properly federal; indeed there was no connection between its Senate and the Councils of the affiliated Colleges. O'Rorke was always oppost::d to the system of having examiners in England, but motions to abolish this system had been regularly out-voted on Senate since 1886. In 191 1 O'Rorke fo und only one supporter, George Hogben, the Inspector­ General of Schools.4° ln 1909 university reform was a topic much in the news. A Committee reported on the Welsh universities. The Haldane Commission on the University of London was set up. A Royal Commission reported on the University of Melbourne in 1902. In New Zealand, and especially in Auckland, where he gave a lecture on universities, discussion was sparked off by a visitor, President Oavid Starr Jordan of the Leland Stanford Junior University in California. He was very critical of the examining system and wrote to Sir Robert Stout (at his invitation), 'Let examination be a func­ tion of the professor, not of the University.' In a letter to the Press Jordan said that the external examination tended 'to degrade the New Zealand professor to a coach'. He said that the exaggerated importance attached to the final examination was one of the bad British university traditions that New Zealand could well do without. (Tradi­ tions died hard at the antipodes). He also suggested doing away with the matricula­ tion examination in favour of certificates fr om approved secondary schools, and recommended the 'major' system, that is, advancing one subject to a high level in

88 COLLEGE LIFE combination with some 'minors'. In general he wanted to give more educational initiative to the professorial boards.41 Some earlier visitors, like Sidney and Beatrice Webb and Andre Siegfried, had commented on the colleges, but he was academically the best informed visitor; cool overseas eyes cast over the colleges were to be salutary on several later occasions. Two of the Auckland professors were among the first to launch a campaign for reform. On capping day in June 1909 Professor Brown denounced the casual way in which the Senate of the University of New Zealand was made up, without any guarantee that its members would include any mineralogists, engineers, or members of other professions whose training it determined. 42 Professor Segar then took up the cudgels in a long letter to the Star. He had, he said, first expressed his views in an (anonymous) article in The Kiwi in 1908, which criticized Senate for making academic decisions when there was no legal requirement that any academics should be among its members. It was 'a lay body'-of its nineteen members there were seven professors but also seven lawyers and three medical doctors. Most professions and subjects were unrepresented. 'Am l dreaming of some Gilbertian world?' he wondered and went on to make one of the most striking and depressing statements about the university that was made by the early professors at Auckland:

No university is raised to fa me, no srudenr is inspired by the teacher that merely does his prescribed duty. lt should be the policy of every university to encourage devotion on the part of its staff by showing confidence in its members, and granting that recognition which the conferring of positions of honour and trust bestows. Under the policy fo llowed in New Zealand, the enthusiasm which professors fi rst bring to their work is gradually damped and dispelled. There should be a spirit as well as a body in a professor's work; here the soul is crushed. Shut out so largely from control in their own sphere, labelled in effect as unfit for work they ought ro do, told they cannot be trusted to examine or to govern, the professorial class cannot but lose much of their professional self-respect along with their enthusiasm, gradually imbibe the mercenary character of much of their surroundings, and come to regard their profession not as an object of devotion, hut ns a mere means of livelihood.43

T. G. Tucker was to write from Melbourne that the external examining system in New Zealand was 'humiliating'.44 The Vice-Chancellor of the University of New Zealand, C. C. Bowen, said in July 1909 in Otago that the colleges would one day become separate universities, but not for a few generations. The Star canvassed opinions on this topic. O'Rorke thought the change might come, but not for twenty or fifty years (in fact it was to be sixty). Professor Brown thought the change would come within twenty years, but he fe ared that with examinations being marked in New Zealand, because of college rivalries, examiners would be accused of partiality. Grossmann was against separate univer­ sities 'for a very long time to come'. He thought that examination by 'distinguished professors at Home' gave a certain cachet to the New Zealand degree. 45 And it was true that they were distinguished: the economics examiner was Maynard Keynes; the lawyer, W. S. Holdsworth, and the historian, C. W. C. Oman, were other examiners. Arthur Jarman, the Professor of Mining Engineering, one of the most vigorous of the Auckland staff of the time, replied in public to these opinions. Probably for the first time at Auckland a staff member pronounced that 'the reputation of a

89 A HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND

University depends chiefly upon the original research accomplished within its walls'; he added, 'and the reputation of its graduates'. He denounced the inconsistency of the examining system-practical work was examined locally, for example in medicine. Surely what was good enough in matters of life or death should be satisfactory for Latin or botany? He suggested that the local professors could examine in pairs or in rotation, and rejected Brown's fear of partiali­ ty. The 'proper selection' of the teaching staff (a stab at Walker?) was more important than the appointment of external examiners. Finally, he dismissed the views of Grossmann, who had never studied outside New Zealand:

To one formerly accustomed to setting papers and reporting thereon for degree examina­ tions in a more important University, it is, to say the least, surprising to be told by Mr. Grossmann that this demand for local examination is 'due to a mistaken sense of self­ assertiveness.' Perhaps I may he pardoned if I venture the opinion thm if some of the professors were a little more assertive, the colleges and education generally would be the better for it."6

Grossmann replied at length:

It seems to me that when Professor Jarman and I talk about 'the value of the degree' we do not mean exactly the same thing. Professor Jarman says that the value of the degree depends upon the quality of the work done by the graduates who secure it; and no doubt in one sense this is true. But the value of which I spoke was the practical, rather than the educational, value. I observe that Professor Jarman says that he would be interested to hear the opinion of 'the general body of students' about all this. Well, as things are, it is obvious that our Univer­ sity students have to regard their degrees to some extent as a means of gaining a living, and they cannot afford to be satisfied with any kind of University course, however admirable it may be educationally, which would not give them a high academical status, or afford them an easy means of approach to lucrative professional work, and enable them to command a good market price for their services. 47

He realized that to Jarman this argument might seem 'rather sordid' (dare one say philistine) but he strongly urged the value of an overseas 'imprimatur' as producing 'the maximum impression of academic dignity and educational value upon the general public'. Grossmann also promoted his views anonymously as a 'leader' writer in the Auckland Star. Although Auckland professors had argued for reform, the leadership of the movement now passed to some young and very able professors at the Victoria University College. ln May 1910 they held a meeting in the Wellington Town Hall on the issue of reform, which was widely reported. Grossmann was the author of three Star editorials criticizing them. He sent them to George Fowlds, the Minister of Education, admitting that, 'Of course there is nothing in the way of constructiq;e reform in my remarks-merely criticism of the Wellington movement.'48 In his editorials he disparaged the New Zealand professors (he was not yet one of them) and asserted that the reformers wanted the staffto examine their own students. He simply ignored the possibility of the staff of the several colleges assessing one another's mark­ ing, as one of the Wellington men, T. A. ('Tommy') Hunter, remarked in reply. To his knowledge no reformer had requested the absolute power of passing or fa iling his

90 COLLEGE LlFE: STAFF AN D STUDIES own students. Grossmann had further obscured this issue by claiming that because the College staff set and marked 'terms' examinations, the reformers' claim that examining was divorced from teaching was untrue. Hunter retorted that the results of the most brilliant student in the College examinations were of no avail if he fa iled the examination set in England. The local staff passed no one fo r the degree itself. Grossmann also alleged that the reformers wanted four separate universities. Hunter replied, 'It is true that you say it is an "irresistible inference," but any inference is ir­ resistible for those who have determined to get it, and who allow themselves the greatest latitude in the selection of their premises.'49 Three Victoria professors, Hunter, Laby, and von Zedlitz, put out an able pam­ phlet, University Reform in New Zealand ( 191 1), to argue the need fo r a Royal Commission into university education. In it they rehearsed most of the old criticisms of the university system in New Zealand, and added some new ones. Some of their barbs were clearly pointed to the north. For instance, that there was evidence that successfu l coaching had been regarded as demonstrating a man's fitness fo r a chair: in their view no one not active in original research was chair-worthy. Furthermore, a College Council had appointed a man to a chair without notice of motion and without expert academic advice on his qualifications. (This was certainly a reference to Maxwell Walker.) They also criticized the multiplicity of subjects taught by some lecturers-specifically referring to Grossmann's combination of subjects. Many aspects of university education attracted their criticism: overseas examining, which had been opposed by O'Rorke's Royal Commission in 1878, was denounced, as was the preponderance of evening classes in the North Island. The B.A., the reformers believed, was held down to the standards of the evening and part-time

Surl'ivors of O\:erseas examination: /912 graduates. FROM LEFT, BACK ROW: not known, P. S. Smale, K. Dellow, M. D. Rohan, F. A. Taylor, G.M. Stewart; MIDDLE ROW: not known, N. R. ]acobsen, S. H. Ellis, not known, not known, not known, A. Wa llace (Rhodes Scholar), }. C. Brook; FRONT ROW: Eva ]. Cumming, Hilda Kirkbride, D. C. Chalmers, Mabel Freeman, Dorothy Holmden, not known A HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND students. They were critical of the system of university government, notably the lay control of academic matters. This was true not only in the University Senate but in the College Councils. In the three southern colleges there were one or two professors on Council, but in Auckland none, yet Council controlled not only appointments bur the general policy, including timetables and other reaching arrangements. The history of the university reform movement has been related in great derail, though too much from a Wellington point of view, in ]. C. Beaglehole's two univer­ sity histories. The Auckland staff did not, at first, respond favourably to the Victoria initiative. When the Education Committee of the House of Representatives invited the professors to give evidence related to the Victoria petition requesting a Royal Commission, the Auckland Professorial Board declined because no one could go to Wellington in term rime. When the Committee then invited written submissions, the Professorial Board simrly 'received' the invitation. The Auckland College Council resolved that there was no need fo r a Royal Commission. 5° There was still a great deal of provincial jealousy evident in relations between the colleges. Many examples of this could be given. For example, the Auckland Council believed that occasional meetings of staff with their southern colleagues were desirable, yet when Canterbury suggested biennial conferences the Auckland professors, while recognizing the possible advantages, did not think the grounds were sufficient. Similarly, when Canterbury suggested a joint memorial to the government about pensions, Auckland preferred each Board to act akme.51 There was rarely a sign of friendly co-operation. Sir Robert Stout, the Chancellor, steadfastly opposed the reformers, claiming that the professors wanted to dominate the University in all academic marrers. Never­ theless, they came close to success over external examiners in 1912, when James Alien, who was soon to be Minister of Education, moved in fa vour of local examin­ ing. The motion was defeated only by the casting vote of Stout as Chancellor. Both Or McDowell and Professor Brown, of Auckland, voted ::�gainst the motion.SZ Brown fa voured reform in some matters, but defended the overseas examination. McDowe\1 gave evidence to the Education Committee of the House, speaking as a Senate Member, hut also as the representative of the Auckland University College Graduates' Association, which had been fo rmed in 1903. He vehemently defended overseas examining which was a hall-mark upon a New Zealand degree. He thought that provincial jealousies would make local examinations unfair. And he defended night classes (he had begun as a part-time student) as 'the glory of our university system' because it was democratic. 53 The Education Committee did not recommend the arpointment of a Royal Commission, but it diJ ask Hogben, the Inspector-General, to report on two aspects of university education, the improvement of college finances and the strengthening of college libraries, 'especially in the interests of research'. There was criticism of his appointment. Professor Hunter and his friends expressed surprise that the head of the primary and secondary schools should be brought in 'to over-ride the College Coun· cils and Professorial Boards'; they thought that someone experienced in university organization should have been called upon. 54 Nevertheless, Hogben was a supporter of the reformers; he made a thorough investigation and wrote a detailed report. He recommended that the statutory grants to Auckland and Victoria should be raised to £7,000 a year with lesser increases fo r the southern colleges and th::�tthe four colleges

92 COLLEGE LIFE: STAFF AND STUDIES should also receive £2,500 a year from national education endowments. He also proposed an increase in funds for the college libraries. 55 The Education Committee of the House of Representatives had not recommended a Royal Commission partly because it believed that the University Senate might itself institute necessary reforms. This did not, however, occur; indeed Stout set his deter­ mined face against the reformers. Two professorial conferences, called by Senate, met in 1910 and 1912 and discussed the degree structure and other topics. The second, chaired by Segar of Auckland, recommended abolishing the external examination within five years. 56 Senate responded by rejecting this recommendation by seventeen to six, and by abolishing the professorial conference. 57 This caused an outcry and all fo ur colleges now petitioned Parliament fo r a Royal Commission. Thirty-three of the country's fo rty-four professors signed the petitions. O'Rorke's name headed the Auckland petition. Once again the Education Committee of the House sat and failed to see the need fo r a Royal Commission, but it did accept a suggestion from Hogben that a Board of Studies, representing the Professorial Boards, should be set up to advise the Univer­ sity Senate on academic matters. It also recommended legislation to make Senate representative mainly of the Councils of the affiliated Colleges-at the time it represented graduates and Councils, plus fo ur government appointees and fo ur representatives of the Professorial Boards. It also recommended extra fu nds for Auckland, Victoria, and the Otago medical school. 58 In 1914 Parliament passed the New Zealand University Amendment Act which set up the Board of Studies, with fi ve representatives from each Professorial Board, but the constitution of Senate was not altered. There were no more fu ndamental reforms; and there was to be no Royal Commission. The reformers were defeated. The colleges did, however, receive some fi nancial help. Auckland's statutory grant was raised to £9,000 and it was to receive about £1,000 a year from the national educational endowments. From 1913 onwards the College also received the students' fe es-£2 ,534 in that year. The staff salaries were adjusted to compensate fo r the loss of fe es. The Act also created fo ur National Research Scholarships fo r postgraduate science students-the first step to encourage such research in New Zealand. In 1912, the government had amended the constitu­ tion of the Auckland College Council by adding two professorial representatives. The Massey Government also moved to settle the 'site row' which had gone on in Auckland, from time to time, ever since 1872.

93