47
essen the high aim its founder had for it.
3.
The Chairman said that the meeting was indebted to Sir Edward for his clear picture and hoped that members would ask any questions they would like to put, because Sir Edward might not be able to attend another moeting.
4. Mr. Sloss asked what was the starting point in the deliberations of the Committée. Could the Committee assume
that the expression of the views of the Colonial Office outlined in Paper No. 3 was still the accepted policy and that that policy had not only the acquiescence but the active approval of the Foreign Office also? If that could be the starting point, the Committee's considerations were a good deal simplified, and their major concern would be with questions of the staff, buildings and equipment required to achieve the ends defined by Lord Lugard and reaffirmed by the British Government. If, on the other hand, these social and political ends were considered impossible of achievement by means of a first rate British University in Hong Kong, then he took it that the Committee were asked to consider alternatives and whether a more narrowly conceived university in Hong Kong would be desirable. The Committee was asked to advise in any case on a short-term policy. What could be done immediately or almost immediately to restart certain essential activities of the University and how could those things be achieved without prejudice to an adequate consideration of the more important long-term plan? The essential matter therefore on which he would like Sir Edward's assurance, was that the Committee could proceed on the assumption that the policy of Government was definitely defined as involving the development of the University in relation to Chin^.
50
Sir Edward Gent said that in 1939 the University found itself very short of money and, in connection with a suggestion that the grant from the Hong Kong Government should be increased, the question was raised of whether the Hong Kong Government was paying for something which was a higher education institution for Hong Kong; or a University which was a valuable instrument for spreading British influence in China. The 1939 Committee on the Development of the University, with which Mr. N.L. Smith was concerned, took a realistic view and was inclined to clip its wings. The Colonial Office, however, stood by the decision to maintain the University, provided that funds could be made available and the support of the Foreign Office was forthcoming. outbreak of war put the whole matter into cold storage. Later the question was brought up again and discussed as a matter of policy, the conclusion of the Colonial Office being as set out in No. 3. It was considered however that it would not be proper to exclude from the terms of reference of the present committoo the opportunity of advising that the Colonial Office policy was wrong if they reached that conclusion, and (a) of the terms of reference was therefore
included.
The
6. The Chairman said the answer to Mr. Sloss's question was therefore that the policy of the Colonial Office was as set out in No.1 and reaffirmed in No.3, but that the terms of reference had been so drawn as to provide the Committee with an opportunity of indicating, if they thought so, that this policy was wrong.
In this connection he would like to refer to two points arising out of the papers that had been circulated. No.7 was a letter from a former Governor, Sir Androw Caldecott, who in this capacity was Chancellor of the University. As members
/of
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.