The latest issue of the Monthly is eminently readable. There is much in it of interest, value and entertainment. Above all there seems to be an absence of the apparently overpowering critical instinct which so pervades most numbers--little recourse, in fact, to antedeluvian poets or appreciations of literature which but for the efforts of the writer, would probably never, be unearthed. The first article particularly the "Ph.D. Octopus," by William James, strikes one as being vital and altogether human. The statement that only a man of evident native power is now allowed to receive the degree, and that for a college to appoint instructors only with such qualifications is snobbery and sham, seem hardly consistent. Nevertheless the main point of the article--an appeal to value more the individuality of a man and his abilities than parchment he may possess--appeals to anyone's sentiment and sense--and is advanced with straightforward convincing earnestness.

"Some Aspects of Matthew Arnold," by H. L. Warner, shows a remarkable maturity of method and fine critical insight. The value in criticism of a criticism, however, might be questioned. A one act play, "The Ingrate," had better been a story. As it is the excessive detail and labelling of characters detract from the effectiveness of the incident. The ending just misses being of exceptional power. "Everyman," by Laird Bell is an uncommonly sane judgment of the play of that name.

The editorials are much longer than usual and have something of interest to talk about. The one relating to the President's report, however, seems rather unnecessarily limited to "intelligent graduates!" The number ends with an adequate book review by R. M. G.