ternity houses and which ones from men not so affiliated; other than this there was no mark upon the papers to identify the writers. In almost every case the fraternity man was more radical or more pessimistic than his independent college mate, a situation explainable, perhaps, from the fact that fraternity men, living in a somewhat more congested way than other men, are likely to have closer associations, to know more about what is actually going on among each other and, because of their close personal friendly relations, to be franker and more open in confessing their derelictions.
Naturally the replies to the questions varied widely in specific instances, but it was interesting to see how closely in the main the majority of the students agreed. Seventy per cent. of the men admitted that they had cribbed at one time or another, and fifteen per cent. of those who sent in replies ignored the question. Those who affirmed that they had never themselves cribbed were more optimistic with reference to the universality of the practice than were the others, though not more rigid in their suggestion as to discipline. One man said that in attempting to discover how widespread the practice of cribbing was he had made inquiry of twenty of his class-mates and friends, and that nineteen of the twenty admitted that at one time or another they had used some illegitimate method in an examination. Some of the men said they had never given the practice any consideration or attention, they had paid attention solely to their own business, had seen no one engaged in dishonest methods, and so had no opinion to offer. More than fifty per cent. of those answering, how-
