supposed less likely to decide correctly in matters of this kind, than in most others which may come before it.

*

Of the correctness of this opinion, and of the practice, which has sprung from it, we have in general no doubt; and in calling the attention of our readers to the late disturbances in Harvard University, we do not invite them to a discussion of the immediate causes of those difficulties, or to a consideration of the facts disclosed in the recent circulars of the President and Faculty of the University on the one part, and of members of the Senior class in that institution, on the other. Such an appeal would doubtless authorize us to enter minutely into the circumstances of the affair, could we see any considerable advantage in such a measure. As no such advantage occurs to us, we shall at present confine ourselves principally to the discussion of a general topic, having no relation to the particular merits of the recent transactions, and only incidentally arising from them.

We have observed, in some of the daily papers, an intimation that all such difficulties ought to be settled within the walls of the University, without permitting them to find their way into the civil courts. If by this intimation, is only meant, that it has not been the common practice of our colleges to resort to other courts than their own, for the purpose of repressing disorders, although many examples of a contrary practice might be adduced, we should scarcely reckon such a point worth our discussion; but if it is intended, that it is better that the Faculty should form themselves into courts for the trial of breaches of the laws of the land, when the students of the college to which they belong happen to be parties, than to leave the jurisdiction where those laws have left it, in the hands of the public magistrate, we would beg leave to offer some reasons for dissenting from such an opinion. Our readers will perceive, that we are about to contend for a general principle, and not for its application to a particular case.

The question which we wish to discuss is not whether the Faculty ought in such case to deliver over the student to the operation of the municipal law, but whether it is either expedient or right by erecting a new tribunal, practically to shelter him from the penalty of laws, which were enacted for the general regulation of the community. It would be interesting to

trace the origin of this practice, but it would probably throw very little light upon the question of its expediency. We will proceed therefore at once to offer some reasons for the opinion that we have long held, that it is expedient that municipal laws

should be enforced within the walls of colleges, in the same manner as in other departments of society.

1. Our first reason is, that by the custom now prevalent, an odious privilege, or what is at least considered as a privilege, is granted to the members of colleges, and one which is not enjoyed by young men in any other situation. In all other circumstances they are amenable to the laws of the land, when they conduct in a manner inconsistent with those laws. If an apprentice or a clerk chooses to amuse himself or to gratify a revengeful spirit, by breaking windows, or by any other breach of the peace, he knows that the penalties of the law must follow upon detection. On the contrary, the student, though properly a subject of the same laws, has reason to believe that a college censure, or an addition to his quarterly bill, is all the punishment which a similar act on his part can bring upon him; and that he shall probably escape even from this, as none of his companions will testify against him. It is therefore in his power to indulge a revengeful or tyrannical humor to almost any extent, without drawing upon himself a corresponding punishment. Peculiar privileges of this nature do not belong to republican institutions, and we suspect that if their operations were fully disclosed, they would not be tolerated by the American public.

2. The ends of justice cannot, in most cases, be attained by the Faculty, where a civil magistrate would find very little dif ficulty. The former cannot obtain the requisite testimony, and in case of conviction they can inflict no adequate punishment. The sentiment is nearly universal in colleges, that it is dishonorable to testify voluntarily against a companion; and any disclosure enforced only by college punishments is considered as voluntary. Hence the students generally refuse to testify, and those, who are induced from conscientious or other motives to deviate from the common practice, are set up as marks of popular vengeance. In these circumstances the Faculty are compelled either to resort to private information,-a most odious measure; to extort confessions from the party accused,—a measure scarcely less odious, as no man should be compelled to testify to facts which criminate himself;-or last, and most degrading of all, to skulk about the college premises, for the purpose of detecting culprits while engaged in mischief, or of overhearing their conversation.

3. Investigations of this nature tend greatly to alienate the affections of the students from their instructors. They look upon them, not as parents or guardians, but as judges and executioners. Minor offences might under a different system still

call for the interference of the Faculty as the guardians of the laws of college, but to those necessary causes of irritation it seems unwise to add others for which no necessity exists.

4. The present system is productive of great oppression. This is felt in the first place by those members of the Faculty, who happen to incur the popular odium. Experience shows, that the unpopularity of a tutor or a professor is in many cases not imputable to any fault or even indiscretion on his part, but to his attempting to execute with peculiar fidelity the duties of his office. When a dislike of this kind has been once conceived, the laws which regulate the intercourse of polished society, are completely set aside in the treatment shown to such a member of the Faculty, and violence and outrage are resorted to, often with perfect impunity on the part of the aggressors; because though their conduct may be known to great numbers of their companions, no one will testify against them before the Faculty. Were such outrages prosecuted by the civil magistrate, revenge it is true might still seek its gratification by secret acts of aggression; but resentment of this character is seldom found in the minds of the young. Their vices are generally social, and if none can witness their exploits, a principal motive for their perpetration is removed.

This system operates also very oppressively upon the well disposed students. They are almost compelled to take part with persons, of whose conduct they often at heart disapprove, and whose characters they despise. They would not thus unite in opposing the civil magistrate, or in trifling with those laws upon which civil society depends. The distinction between the innocent and criminal, when viewed in relation to the laws of the land, is such, that in a well ordered community, no one would be expected to countenance the guilty.

The peaceable student is oppressed also by the pecuniary contributions levied upon him to atone for the depredations committed by others. The amount of contributions thus levied upon the members of our colleges would be found in the aggregate to be very great, although the individual exaction in a particular case may be small. The property recently destroyed in the disturbances at Cambridge, is estimated in the circular published by the students, at three hundred dollars, and they observe, that heavier assessments have occurred within the last year or two. We wish that some one, who has the means, would ascertain the amount of charges of this nature upon the bills of any of our most considerable colleges for the last ten years. Most of this expense, we believe, would be prevented,

if the laws of the land were permitted to punish trespasses when committed by students, in the same manner as when committed by others.

Another mode, in which the peaceable members of a college are oppressed, is by depriving them of the opportunity to pursue quietly their studies. During times of extensive commotion in college, attention to study is not only prevented by the general bustle, but it is stigmatized as a mean attempt to gain the favor of the Faculty. Of the amount of suffering which may thus be inflicted upon a student, who takes no part in a disturbance, and who aims only to accomplish the purpose, for which his friends are supporting him at college the advancement of his education, those who are unacquainted with the subject can scarcely form an adequate conception. His neutrality is often misconstrued into hostility to his fellow students, and if any one chooses to set him up as an object of general indignation, he has but to insinuate that he is an informer, and his ruin is inevitable.

Many other reasons might be offered in favor of abandoning the system of interference, between the members of a college and the laws of the land, but we will mention but one more.

5. It is injurious to the best interests of the students themselves, who are protected by this privilege. Laws are intended to serve the double purpose of restraining vice, and of making atonement for wrongs. The former is far the more important purpose, and it is principally for this end, that the penalties of the law are enacted. To be free from the operation of wholesome laws, then, is to be destitute of one of the most powerful restraints imposed upon our corruptions, and leaves us in a greater degree exposed to their indulgence.

We recollect but one objection, that we have ever heard, to leaving the members of colleges subject to the civil laws; and this objection was made by a member of a college Faculty. He found that parents would be averse to sending their sons to a college, when their irregularities might be so severely punished. To this we would reply, that if all colleges would abandon their present practice, no inconvenience would be felt by any one of them in particular. In fact, however, parents are constantly sending their sons into other situations of equal or greater danger, where they are subject to no other than the general municipal laws. It is, moreover, because we believe that it would be best for young men at college, as well as for those concerned in their instruction, to return to the simple principles, by which society in general is governed, that we have been urging the abandonment of a system not less inju

rious than unnatural. The state of society now existing in colleges is extremely artificial. We would wish the situation of our youth while receiving their education, to be, as nearly as possible, the same as that in which they will be placed in their subsequent lives. Their residence in college would then be a direct preparation for the active scenes of life, instead of leading them to form notions of the most fantastic and unnatural character, and such as must be abandoned upon their entrance into society.

We have no doubt, that a general abandonment of this interference with the operation of law would soon remove many of the evils, which have nearly rendered our colleges intolerable to our more reflecting citizens. If the execution of the laws against violence and other crimes were left to the civil magistrate, upon the complaint of the common informing officer, or of the party injured, as is the case in every other department of society, and were this remnant of an odious and pernicious privilege, analogous to that of benefit of clergy, removed, we believe that an important step would be taken towards the renovation of our highest literary institutions.

Another measure of some utility for the same purpose would probably be, to discard the system of college honors, or at least to have them assigned by a Board of Examiners, really, as well as nominally, independent of the Faculty. The two principal sources of disaffection would thus be in a great measure removed.

But there is one other topic of great importance, in relation "to disturbances in colleges, to which our limits will not permit us at this time to do more than briefly to refer, we mean moral and religious influence. Where most attention is paid to this subject, it is well known, that disturbances are of least frequent occurrence; and in the best state of religious feeling in public seminaries no difficulties of any magnitude occur in the government. This consideration certainly merits the attention of the officers of those colleges, in which serious disturbances most frequently arise. It would be well in such cases to inquire, whether there has not been an omission or relaxation of the public and private means of moral and religious amendment,

means entrusted to the Faculty in the providence of God, for purposes of the greatest present and future interest. Such results as we have been considering are a proof of an unhappy state of moral feeling; for angry contentions, violence and outrage, are not the fruits of the Spirit of God, nor proofs of discipleship to him, who is emphatically styled the Prince of Peace.

A**.