bers the degree of this superiority of the Phi Beta Kappa man over the rest of his college class. Professor Dexter (Popular science monthly, March, 1903), from whose articles I have taken most of my data, concludes that the Phi Beta Kappa man has 2.8 as great a chance to get into Who's who as has the average college graduate. But Professor Dexter's ratio for the average college man-as I shall show later on-is based upon too generous an estimate in regard to the total number of living alumni that may be said to enter into the comparison. By taking these data from the actual alumni lists of a sufficient sample of these colleges, the ratio of superiority reduces to 1.55; and there are other considerations that lead one to regard the latter number as representing the degree of superiority more fairly than the former number. There is no uniform ratio as to the degree of this superiority in the several colleges. At Harvard, Bowdoin, Cornell, Dartmouth, Wesleyan, and Williams, the Phi Beta Kappa man is twice as successful or more than twice as successful as the rest of the college in getting into Who's who. At Columbia, Yale, and Trinity he is less than half again as successful. At Amherst and Brown he is about equally successful. At Hamilton and Middlebury he is actually less successful. I have no way of accounting for this difference. The considerable variation of the ratios themselves would indicate that the superiority is dependent upon rather complex factors. On the other hand, if we confine attention to the college men who do succeed in getting into Who's who, we may accept Professor Dexter's statement that 39.3 per cent. of the Who's who college men are members of Phi Beta Kappa, while of the college classes concerned, on the average only 15.7 per cent. were elected to this honor society. This ratio 2.5 to 1—is a fair expression within the college class, of the Phi Beta Kappa superiority as tested by distinction in later life.

In the case of two of the larger New England colleges the exact standings in class of its graduate members were investigated with the further conclusion-quite in reversal of the ordinary belief that those who graduate at the head of their classes usually turn out to be very commonplace mortals, if

not actual failures-that by far the largest percentage (5.4) of mentions in Who's who is found among those who graduated in the first tenth of their class; and the second and third tenths furnish an appreciably greater clientèle (2.7 per cent.) for Who's who than do the remainder of the class, who represent its average (1.8 per cent). and fairly uniform contribution to Who's who distinction. Professor Dexter has even found for a limited group of classes, that the men who graduate at the head and in the second and third places in their classes, distinctly excel even the high proportion of Who's who men that was achieved by the first tenth of the class. This preponderance in favor of the high-grade and of the highest-grade of college men, decided by the ability to achieve the Who's who type of distinction in after life, is convincingly established.

The present inquiry aims by a similar method to compare the success of various colleges and various types of colleges by the comparison of the proportion of their graduates who are mentioned in Who's who. This comparison is quite difficult to make—not ideally, but practically-because the data that are most desirable are not forthcoming. In many respects it will be necessary to confine the inquiry within the limits for which the data are most nearly available. What we first wish to know is the number of college men who are mentioned in Who's who, and what is their distribution. Furthermore, it is not at all necessary that our count should be exhaustive; if it includes a half, or any fair proportion of college graduates, we shall be dealing with a sufficiently large sample of the whole. Our educational system, or want of it, has produced such an absurdly extensive number of institutions that call themselves colleges, or more usually and with less modesty, universities, that any statistical investigation is confronted by an embarrassing array of possible enumerations. The great mass of colleges of this type, of which any individual college would contribute but a very small handful to Who's who, will only be incidentally considered in this investigation.

As to the distribution of the Who's who collegians, the inquiry begins naturally with their distribution as to time. The

chronological presentation is interesting. For this purpose I have taken my statistics rather liberally, without much correction for any specific purpose, and have included about 60 per

The curve represents the actual number of living college graduates (of a considerable selection of colleges) whose date of graduation falls within the five-year periods indicated below. Thus '40 means the years from 1840 to 1844 inclusive. The numbers at the sides indicate the actual number of college graduates enumerated in Who's who: thus the portion of the curve from 1870 to 1874 (which represents the maximum) shows that within this period there are 367 living graduates of the included colleges. The most notable irregularity in the curve is that due to the Civil War. The decade from 1860 to 1865 shows a decided diminution in living graduates, the defection being fully restored only in the period beginning with 1870. The broken line indicates the probable distribution for the period 18601870, had there been no civil war.

cent. of all the college men included in Who's who-all that I have tabulated. Grouping them in five-years periods, there appear to be of those who graduate between 1829 and 1834, 12; between 1834 and 1839, 25; between 1840 and 1844. 44; between 1844 and 1849, 92; between 1850 and 1854. 174;

between 1855 and 1859, 276; between 1860 and 1864, 292; between 1865 and 1869, 298; between 1870 and 1875, 367; between 1875 and 1879, 363; between 1880 and 1884, 334; between 1885 and 1889, 266; between 1890 and 1894, 158; between 1895 and 1898, 23; in all, 2724. When these data are placed pictorially before the eye, certain relations become evident. The distribution follows a very regular path, save for one striking interruption, falling in the period between 1860 and 1870. The Civil War turned many away from college and diminished the number of graduates for that period, and the individuals thus deprived of a college degree-supposing them to contribute their due share to Who's who-will naturally not fall within the enumeration expressed by this curve. This gives one a very realistic sense of the fact that these numbers represent the resultant of a fairly complex, but very real state of affairs. This impression is intensified when we similarly survey, as the edition of 1903 enables us to do, the general age-distribution of the total enrollment of Who's who. When this is tabulated, we obtain a curve that is in all respects so similar to the collegiate curve that it is not worth while to complicate the chart by adding it thereto. It must be noted that the second edition of the publication gave no basis for computing the general curve and that the collegiate curve here presented was plotted before the appearance of the third edition. To find so striking a similarity in the result is a welcome evidence of the significance of the status here exhibited, and of the fact that the collegiate curve may be regarded as a fair sample of the entire enrollment. In only one respect is a difference to be noted large enough to be significant, except that naturally the curve based upon the larger numbers is smoother than the more limited curve. This relates to the defection produced by the Civil War; while the same break in the continuity of the curve occurs, it is less marked: thus indicating that the period of the war was more effective in keeping men from college than in preventing them from acquiring distinction. Apart from those who lost their lives in this conflict and so still leave the impress of their loss. in the American book of the honorable living forty years after,

we have an indication that the suvivors in due proportion achieved distinction, altho they were in specially large measure deprived of the aid thereto offered by a course in college. In the curve, as shown on the left-hand side, the rapid diminution expresses the increasing mortality with years. Even supposing that there were as many candidates for Who's who distinction in these earlier classes as for the middle period and the later years, (which of course is not the case,) there would be a rapid decline of the representation of the earlier graduates owing to their dying out. The actual curve represents the combination of both of these factors. The middle period of life, including the groups from 1860 to 1885, embraces by far the greatest measure of Who's who collegians—in all 64 per cent. of the whole-a proportion that would be still higher were it not for the decrease resulting from the Civil War. For the last and youngest group of collegians the representation again sharply and rapidly declines. The cause of this decline is the fact that it takes a considerable number of years for a college graduate, or indeed for any promising man at that period of life, of however excellent gifts, to establish his rank, make his name, and thus be enrolled in Who's who. As the left portion of the curve is predominantly an index of mortality, so the right portion becomes an index of immaturity. This decline might possibly be more pronounced than it actually is, were it not for the fact that the number of these young collegians, owing to the decided increase in college classes, is a distinctly larger one, and so in some measure counterbalances the smaller portion of this generation who have within a few years established a Who's who reputation. Yet this does not apply in greater measure to young college graduates than to promising young men in general.

While our ultimate interest is centered in the ratio of the Who's who collegians to the total number of living graduates from among whom they were selected, it is interesting to consider more closely the distribution of the living graduates and their contributions to the Who's who volume. It must be emphasized that the datum that is most difficult to secure is that of the actual number of graduates alive in any one