EDITORS DAILY CRIMSON:- Your remarks in Wednesday issue about hour examinations seem well-founded. They undoubtedly voice the sentiment of nine-tenths of the students on that subject. If we are to have a return of regular, oft-recurring examinations, let us have them in the shape of monthlies, to whose occurrence we can look forward with certainty. Such an arrangement would be far less disagreeable than the present whimsical system.

The instructors in announcing the event of an hour examination generally state that the result of the students' efforts will affect to some extent their marks on the course. If a man be desirous of a good mark, he must therefore "cram," and in doing this must neglect his other courses. It is no child's play to plough through all the notes he must have taken by this time of the year on his various studies. An occasional hour examination is possibly a good thing to beget interest, but that good is hardly great enough, to my mind, to countenance the prevalence of them that now exists. Already this term I have had six; doubtless others have had more.

If the hour examination is meant to stir the lazy, it falls short of its mark. Its occurrence may produce a temporary effect toward industry, but the lasting good that accrues is hard to see. Is it just that the difficult and vexatious work necessary to prepare for an hour examination should be inflicted upon the great number of conscientious students, simply for the good of a few who are either lazy or reckless? It seems that nearly all the instructors are coming to this opinion. Such a system seems to accord ill with the liberal spirit that generally pervades Harvard's action. We believe in a simple warning and then an appeal to the midyear and final examinations to settle the question whether a student has done his duty or not.

G.