SEMIANNUALS, with all their accompanying trials, have been a subject of such general and vital interest to the undergraduate mind during the past three weeks, that the question, Are they an unmixed good? may not be out of place.

In this connection there are two points to be considered, viz. the object of these examinations, and the attainment of that object. As I understand it, their purpose is to test the accuracy and thoroughness of the student's work during the half-year, and upon their result to base his mark and relative standing in his class. To get a good mark, to stand well in his class, is the desire of every good student, and everything should be done by the College authorities to give him legitimate assistance. But does the present system of examinations give the student a fair chance? I think not, for the following reasons. I defy any man, - always leaving out the exceptional genius who is sui generis and therefore outside of all logical argument, - be he ever so faithful a student, to go into an examination and do himself justice or fairly test his technical knowledge of a subject, without a careful review of the matter he is to be examined on. It is the review of a subject that drives it home, that makes it fast in the tenacious grasp of memory. But when do we get the opportunity for this review? During the three weeks allotted to the examinations, you answer. But what if the most of our examinations come during the first week, as is the case with many, where then is the alternative? We have no time before the period of examination commences, since all of it is, or ought to be, taken up in the preparation of our regular recitations. So, when the fatal week comes on, totally unprepared or only slightly buoyed up by exhaustive night-work, we are plunged into waters filled with devouring reptiles, from whom we escape, if at all, with maimed mark and lacerated standing.

But take the more fortunate case, where the examinations are pleasantly sprinkled all along the dusty road, oases as it were in the dreary waste of college life. Even there, I claim, the time is not sufficiently long. To properly review the work of months within three weeks, without "exhaustive toil and midnight oil," is generally impossible. The ambitious student grinds and digs his health away, while the "bummer," secure in the thought of no recitations to-morrow, spends the days in sleep, the nights in "howls."

To all students, then, the present system is disadvantageous; to those whose examinations chance to come unfavorably - for it is all a matter of chance, and the class subject to the caprice of Fortune is a numerous one - it is grossly unfair, while to the most fortunate the limited time does not give fit opportunity for preparation. I therefore think the object of the examinations is not attained, since they do not afford the test desired.

I am not wise enough to suggest a complete remedy, but of one thing I am convinced; more time ought to be given to review in class. Here the instructor might pass rapidly over the past work, emphasizing the salient points only, and bringing into clear relief those facts and principles necessary to an intelligent understanding of the subject. Without such guidance the student may wander fruitlessly among the treasures of Rome, not knowing that he stands before the masterpieces of Michael Angelo and Raphael.