post-graduate college class also means a professor teaching some students. Rivalry between the two sets of professors and students is not nonsensical; for it is a thing which has meaning and can be understood, as, in fact, it is not unthinkable. It may, of course, be very foolish or unwise to permit such rivalry. But the Post-graduate Teaching Committee has allowed this meaningless and foolish thing to exist as between some mofussil colleges and the University. Does that thing which is entirely senseless (in the sense of meaningless and foolish) within a radius of three miles, become perfectly sensible and wise between institutions at a distance of three hundred miles from each other?
Nor does it seem axiomatic to us that rivalry between a university professor and his class and a college professor and his class must necessarily be unhealthy.
We have never urged any objections "against applying a part of the fee-fund of the University to further post-graduate teaching." Our objection is against increasing the fees in order to obtain an additional surplus. Examination fees are levied for efficiently conducting examinations. If there be some surplus,—and there is egnerally every probability of such a surplus, because it is impossible to estimate beforehand the exact total amount of examination expenses and the exact total number of examinees and levy fees accordingly,—it may certainly be applied to any good purpose. S.M. has set up an objection which we have never urged, and has demolished this imaginary objection to his complete satisfaction. We should have liked to have his defence of the enhancement of the examination fees; but he has not favoured us with any.
All M.A.'s, M.D.'s, Ph.D.'s, D.L.'s, D.Sc.'s, M.A.B.L.'s &c., have actually benefited by post-graduate teaching, whereas undergraduate examiners may or may not. How would S.M. like a legislative enactment to levy a super-tax on these products of the university to further post-graduate teaching? But they are tough customers, whereas the under-graduate examinees are weak lambs who can be easily fleeced.
Examination fees can be justly increased only if without such enhancement the examinations cannot be conducted with adequate efficiency, but for no other reason.
An analogy is not a conclusive argument. The soldier knows before enlistment that his duty would be implicit obedience, and, therefore, after he has enlisted, it is not for him to argue in the way that S.M.'s imaginary soldier is supposed to do. Similarly, when the examinee has paid the enhanced fee (supposing the enhancement is sanctioned by the Government of India), he would certainly not be so foolish as to ask the university not to spend the surplus in a particular beneficial way. But he or his advocate is certainly entitled to object to the enhancement, as the soldier is entitled not to enlist; he is entitled even to object to conscription and take the consequences. But as S.M. has not given us a defence or justification of the enhancement of fees, we need not write more on the point.
"To have a good thing money must be spent and must come in some way;" and, therefore, let us tax only those who cannot resist, leaving all Super-graduates in the comfortable enjoyment of their incomes!
No doubt the examinee's "nation will be benefited by his sacrifice;" but is the nation only his? Or is he and he alone in the best possible position to make a sacrifice?
S.M. displays his ignorance when he writes: "An objection has been cited against raising University examination fees on the ground that in a certain Technological College in London a reduction of tuition fees has been proposed to attract more students in these exceptional times." The real facts are that in the Final Report of the Royal Commission on University Education in London, a reduction of fees has been recommended in all London University Colleges. This Commission was appointed in 1910, and its Report was presented in 1913. None of its recommendations, therefore, have or could possibly have anything to do with war conditions, as the war began on July 28, 1914.
KRISHNAKANTA'S WILL
By Bankim Chandra Chatterjee
(All rights reserved)
Part the Second.
CHAPTER I.
IN due course Gobindalal wrote to Haridragram to his dewan to inform him of their safe arrival in Benares. Afterwards he wrote occasionally to this officer; but he never cared to send a line to his wife, which she naturally took very much to heart.
The last letter addressed to the dewan was from Gobindalal's mother. This was to inform him that Gobindalal had recently left Benares.
When Bhramar heard this she thought she must keep her eye on Rohini, for she could not but feel some concern at this piece of intelligence. As for Rohini, she kept at home and attended to her household work as usual except when she went out to the Baruni tank to bathe and fetch
