It is a popular notion that the great majority of honor men and of "first scholars" seldom achieve in after-life a success at all proportionate to their academical standing. But of course this is strictly a popular notion, conceived in accordance with popular ideals. It can be answered that in such cases the scholar's ideal of success is often different from the popular ideal. Now that the ancient institution of wranglers is practically being abolished at Cambridge in England, considerable discussion is being called forth upon this question in the English press, and the recent publication of a complete list of senior wranglers seems to confirm the popular prejudice about the worthlessness of university honors as an index to future success. The last Cornhill Magazine says on the matter : "Our conclusion is a very simple one. It is simply this, that university distinctions are attainable by the same qualities which lead to eminence in after life, and therefore obtainable for the most part by the man of genius if he cares to obtain them. But no university can, of course, make any adequate summary of a man's whole character; sometimes they recognize merit which is too shrinking, and confined within too delicate a frame to make itself felt in after life; more often they have to put a plodding and industrious crammable man on the same level with a man of genius who will distance him by an incalculable amount hereafter." Indeed malcontents are wont to affirm that this is done not only sometimes, but every time. But the judgment of the Cornhill writer will be accepted by most people as substantially correct.