THE NEW HONOR-SYSTEM DEFENDED.

A WRITER in the last Crimson has attacked the new system of honors on the ground that the value of honors will be much diminished, and that the amount of "true scholarship," as distinguished from studying for marks and honors, will also be much diminished. Even the most careless reading of the article shows an inconsistency in the writer's position; for if, as he asserts, the new honors "will rouse as much excitement as the list of Bachelors of Arts," it is extremely unlikely that these worthless honors will be such unusually strong inducements to work as to "double the amount of studying for marks."

It is certainly true that the value of honors is somewhat lowered; but it is not easy to appreciate the writer's reason for considering this an evil, - that the Harvard honors will degenerate to the level of the numerous prizes of "small-sized colleges." Even if this were true, it would be a valid objection only if the purpose of honors were to furnish a subject for undergraduate boast; but, as a fact, they have a definite and much more sensible work to do, - they are intended to furnish inducements to study. And the question is not whether the new honors are in themselves more or less valuable, but whether they are better fitted to encourage study. The writer, at least in the first part of his article, seems to think they are not; that because so many men will receive the lower grades of honors, the list will have no interest to any one. But it is not easy to see how the interest felt in honors which four or five men or which ten or twelve men only succeed in winning is to be materially diminished by the fact that fifty or sixty students win an entirely different honor, one of a much lower grade. It would be fully as reasonable to say that the one man who obtains a degree summa cum laude gets less honor because thirty men have a degree cum laude.

The writer of the article referred to is of the opinion that the men who now get Commencement parts will, under the new system, have "less instigation" to work. This objection might have some show of plausibility if the standard of requirements for parts were lowered, and nothing more done. But by the new system new inducements to work have been offered to these men, - the new grades, "honorable mention" and magna cum laude, have been established, and summa cum laude, an honor which heretofore has had very nearly no effect at all, will now influence the work of perhaps seven men. So, instead of giving less encouragement, the College offers stronger inducements to study to the men who would now get Commencement parts.

As to the effect of the new system on the "middle class," the moderately good scholars, it is asserted that these men will be encouraged to take "soft" electives and to work for marks. This, apparently, is the only sound objection that has been offered; but the writer does not seem to realize that this is an evil, not of the new system merely, but of any honor-system whatever. So long as honors are offered men are likely to neglect their real gain in working for them. It must be borne in mind that an honor-system necessarily starts with the supposition that its inevitable bad results, such as studying for marks, will be counterbalanced by its good results. The difference between the two systems is, that by the new plan the principle of an honor-system - that men should be encouraged to work - is more fully carried out. By the establishment of the several grades, honors may influence the work not only of those who are studying for a Commencement part or for summa cum laude, but of every man whose marks are over seventy per cent; for prizes of some sort will be within easy reach.

There may be a difference of opinion as to whether a specialist "ought to complain" if, under the present system, he gets no credit in his specialty because he takes fifteen and not eighteen hours of work; but probably no one will deny that the new system does him far greater justice.

S.