Sessional_Paper_1931 — Page 245

234

Appendix A.

A LETTER FROM THE PROFESSOR OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TO THE VICE-CHANCELLOR, HONG KONG UNIVERSITY.

Sir William Hornell, c.1.E., M.A.,

Vice Chancellor,

Hong Kong University.

25th March, 1931.

Sir,

I have the honour to submit for your consideration the following suggestions in the hope that they will help to clarify a situation which is at present obscured by a voluminous correspondence extending over several years which has wandered into countless side-tracks. The confusion is due, in my opinion, largely if not wholly to the fact that the main issues have never been clearly stated and in consequence irrelevant matter has been introduced by people who have only con- sidered one aspect of the problem. I therefore venture to put forward the follow- ing outline of my views on the whole subject. This must necessarily be general to keep it within readable limits and it is useless to go into detail until we have secured agreement on the principles which are in my opinion fundamental.

Fortunately there is no difficulty with our civil engineering graduates. They can secure salaries on graduation sufficient to attract students to the Faculty and it has always been the most popular course.

On the other hand no university in the world can turn out mechanical or electrical graduates who are of immediate use to employers and there has been evolved for these graduates an apprenticeship course of two or three years duration which is generally recognized as an essential supplement to their university course.

In Europe and America in particular, and in highly industrialised countries in general there is a demand for specialists in branches of electrical and mechanical work but in a country such as China for some time to come the most useful men will be the men with a wide general knowledge of both electrical and mechanical work. To meet this demand our electrical students take two electrical and one mechanical subject and our mechanical students take two mechanical subjects and one electrical. Our electrical and mechanical courses are therefore interdependent and if the mechanical course is modified there must still be provided for electrical students a course in prime movers of degree standard.

I do not think that any of the local engineering works can provide an ap- prenticeship course for our graduates in any way comparable to the apprenticeship courses in England and this is confirmed by the fact that the apprenticeship courses in England are attended by graduates from all over the Empire and from South America. I think therefore that every effort should be made to send our graduates to England. They can obtain a living wage during the course and there remains only the return fare to be considered which in most cases must be provided by the generosity of shipping firms or by the University as a kind of scholarship. Since the numbers of students is likely to be small for some years this is not really a serious consideration.

During the apprenticeship course all apprentices are encouraged to attend tech- nical classes and can therefore extend and consolidate their theoretical work which could not be done locally and they can obtain either the A.M.I.E.E. or the A.M.I.M.E. qualification at the conclusion of their course.

It is I think generally admitted that it would be the exception rather than the rule for our graduates to obtain permanent employment in Hong Kong, and, if our graduates are to take apprenticeship courses in England, their university work should as far as possible be on the same line as those adopted by English univer- sites. I think therefore that the change made last year in the final year of the mechanical course was definitely a step in the wrong direction and that the subject