A consideration of the new scheme for honors at Cornell University cannot but suggest some defects in our own system. Although in the main no fault can be found with the present system at Harvard, there are a number of details which might be improved. The main point of difference between the systems at the two universities lies in the requisition at Cornell that a candidate for honors in any subject must be in good standing in the other courses not directly belonging to his honor scheme. That is, a candidate for honors in mathematics, for instance, must not only be a man with marked mathematical ability, but must have a fairly good stand in the other subjects of his college course. This does not seem to be the case at Harvard. Of course a man who fails to get his degree would not be allowed, technically, to take honors at graduation, as he does not graduate. But it is possible for a man to get highest honors in a subject who has merely attained the lowest passing mark in his other courses. Furthermore, it is possible for a man to get second-year honors and be dropped the same year. In all this there surely is something wrong.

A man who is a candidate for honors in any course in Harvard College should not only be a man of marked ability in that course, but of good average ability in his other courses.