THE recent action of the Princeton faculty in abolishing supervision of examinations and, instead, requesting students to sign a declaration at the end of their paper to the effect that they have neither given nor received assistance, has given rise to considerable discussion by the press of various colleges. While this regulation has a certain merit of appealing to the honesty of every man and of tending to raise the standard of honor, it may be doubted whether this mere signing of a pledge will make any material difference in the amount of cheating. A man is no more on his honor in writing such a declaration than in signing his name, for the work is just as much his own in either case. If a man does put upon paper what is not his own, he will doubtless have no hesitation in breaking his pledge of honor. It is but a short step from one to the other. The fact, however, that there is no supervision may possibly appeal to even the most dishonest man and show him the littleness of cheating under such conditions. Though every college has, and will continue to have, its class of cheaters, the sense of honor of the vast majority of undergraduates is stronger than is commonly supposed; and if the honest element in college was only more active in denouncing the dishonest element - even if they are all friends and classmates - the standard of honor would be materially raised. The outcome of this action at Princeton will, therefore, be of considerable interest.