EDITORS HARVARD HERALD: Now that the majority of the marks from the mid-year examinations have been returned and complaints against the marking systems are in order, I wish to do my share toward the abolition of this evil though time honored institution of marking by calling attention to a few points connected with forensics.

The faculty have desired that required these by non-honor men cannot be substituted for forensics, that is, they have passed the extroadinary rule that candidates for honors, simply because they are such, no matter whether they take the honor examinations or are awarded honors, shall be ret red from one twenty-first part of this year's work. Now the question is. "Have or have not the less favored non-honor men the right to demand that this rule shall be carried out according to the dictates of common sense and the spirit of this university?" It is currently reported that there are two marks in mathematical theses, one for the course mark, and one for the forensic mark, and it is openly said that in the majority of cases this latter mark is 100, no matter what the course mark may be. Now, it is asked, how is it possible for one piece of work to be marked 82 in one course, and 100 in another, by the same instructor? If 82 was the correct mark for the work considered as a mathematical thesis, 82 was the correct mark for the same work considered as a forensic, for in forensics matter, not form, is the criterion for marking.

In strange contrast with this is that case which occurred last year, when a student in one of the German courses received the maximum mark of 100, and yet for the same theses received under the head of forensics less than 95! Here we have the tables turned. Two things seem certain from these facts, namely, that instructors should remember that it is a difficult thing to get the maximum mark in forensics, and that the same scale should be used in all other departments for marking forensics that is used in the English department, so that the rank list in forensics should not be headed by a number of hundreds obtained by men who are not good writers, and whose work would not stand comparison with that of men far below them on the rank list.

G., '83.