The daily morning journal and courier., 1906-02-03

questions, and he occupies his time in reading or otherwise than watching the students. The students are jeal- ous of their rights under this system. They openly denounce the one profes- sor who requests that they do not leave the examination room. They criticise the suggestions of some pro fessors who advise that they occupy alternate seats. If, on looking over the papers, the professor finds unmistaka- ble evidence of cheating he hands this evidence to the student committee and not to the faculty.
 Cheating at Princeton has been re- duced to a minimum" declared one Of the leading professors, when a Tribune reporter asked him about it, and every man receives the just reward of his la | Dor. The examinations are as orderly | as they were under direct faculty SUI | pervision, and the whole morale of the students is elevated. There is healthy, manly and moral public opin- ion in the university which drives the | offender from its midst as a plague stricken man.
 At Cornell there is a rapidly growing | sentiment against "cribbing" which IS likely to bring about the resumption or the honor system. A few years ago | the system had half hearted sort of a | trial. The professors were not strong ly in favor of it. The students assert ed that the faculty put them on their honor and then watched them. The student count to try offenders was. not well organized and the faculty finally abolished it and went back to the watching system. This put the "crib- ping" question in a new light to most of the students. They declared that it was "up to the instructor or profess sor," and the student who would have exposed another under these conditions would have fared badly with his fel- lows.
 One of the most startling instances of wholesale "cribbing" came to light in 1902, when the Princeton authori ties refused to admit almost an entire class of Andover boys on the ground that they had cheated in examinations | Some had carried written cribs" into the examination room, while others had obviously copied from their neigh bors The Andover faculty declared that the boys had been tempted to cheat because they were taking exami- nations for which they were not ready.
 Arthur W. Ryder, former professor of Andover, wrote at the time: 'The attitude of Andover students toward their school work must occasion seri- ous apprehension among the friends of Phillips Academy; cheating in oral rec itation and in the preparation of writ ten work outside the classroom Is car ried to astonishing lengths. Cheap and Inaccurate translations of Greek and Latin classics, written in execrable English, form a not inconsiderable fraction of the private libraries of many students. Attempts are fre- quently-and sometimes successfully made to secure in advance copies of Yale entrance examinations
 It Is only fair to Andover to say that in the last two years every effort has been made to put down the "crihbing'' evil, and to build up spirit of honor in the boys who prepare for college there.
 In some universities and colleges one finds a peculiar standard. It is not considered dishonorable to cheat in ex- animation if the cheating is done for the purpose of staying in college or to avoid the penalties of neglecting ones books for some athletic sport It is considered distinctly dshonorable, however, when used to make pre- tence of high scholarship. The stand ard seems to be that one must play fair with his fellows and not sail un- dr fals scholarship colors and build up an undeserved reputation, while decep- tive strategy is tolerated in dealing with the authorities.
 This was shown recently in a New England institution where govern ment largely prevails. The faculty handed down to the students who formed the corporate body of the hon. orary society of Phi Beta Kappa list of men whose standing entitled them to membership. As rule the election iS q HUI v lOlillcilly. lltlo LlLHe, uOWSN- CT, the students refused to elect one man on the ground that he was mo- torious ''cribber" His scholarship was known to be a sham, yet he was held in good standing among his class mates.
 Columbia is another institution which has had more or less trouble over examinations. In 1903 the faculty decided to call upon holders of fellow ships and scholarships to act as proc tors at the examinations. Immediately there was 8 great protest. "The Co., lumbia Spectator" demanded to know why the faculty did not make the Phi Beta Kappa key the badge of janitor service. It declared that it was prefer able to give up scholarship rather than spy on one's friends. So strong was the opposition that the plan was abandoned.
 A most peculiar case of violation ot college standards of honor occurred al Brown a couple of years ago. Some time after commencement it was dis covered that the man who had won tht Gaston prize medal had delivered ar address which was not his own. Ii had been previously delivered by stu, l dent at Hamilton college in 1901. The
 RX N ~ A wY