THE editorial in the last Advocate shows a misunderstanding of our position in regard to Honorable Mention. It required very little "reflection" to determine that twenty Themes and Forensics are not the same as eight hours of elective work for one year. The point which we endeavored to make was that the requirements for Honorable Mention, as such, should be the same for all subjects. On this basis, it is reasonable that the requirement in English composition should be 80 per-cent for all the work that comes under that head, even though it is not equivalent to eight hours; for any system of compensations, if once introduced, must be carried on indefinitely to arrive at any real equalization of the amount of work done in different branches. This is manifestly inadvisable, while it is undoubtedly well to give such credit in all branches as is implied by the attainment of a certain distinction. On the other hand, it is impossible to make Honorable Mention in all subjects of equal value; hence, in some cases it may well not be considered a title to a degree cum laude.