We considered the 242 papers published in 1977-86 in the Astrophysical Journal by 49 well-known astronomers (i.e., the living Russell, Warner, Pierce, and Heineman awardees and the AAS Presidents) plus a control group of 242 papers selected at random. We found that the numbers of reviews per paper were 1.34 and 1.37, respectively, or an insignificant 0.5σ difference. The average reviewing time was 2.1σ larger (42.7 days) for the papers by the well-known astronomers than for the control (40.8 days), probably because the former are longer papers on the average. The acceptance rate of 95% is higher for the former than for the control (83%), as one would expect for papers by more experienced authors. Thus, the papers by well-known astronomers do not receive significantly fewer or more-rapid reviews, but a larger fraction of them is eventually accepted.