ROUGHING.

EACH decade of college life brings forth new words, the derivation, meaning, and correct application of which are often distorted; one year they may express one thing, and the next fall into disuse. The word which forms the caption of this article, since it is turned from its usual signification, is illustrative of what we mean. The work entitled "College Words and Customs" contains no definition of it; we infer, from the fact that this book was published some score of years ago, that the word is of comparatively recent origin. It is, however, only a name for certain customs which have always been prevalent in college life. To speak scientifically, we might define roughing as a genus under which come the species hazing and jesting, or as any phrase or word used to denote the ridiculing of another for his faults and vices, or of turning the laugh upon him in consequence of some of his unpleasant peculiarities or blunders. That such a method of correction is deprecated by those who are ignorant of college ways, and even by some who are familiar with them, I am aware. However, if the considerations for and against such a course are weighed, a large balance, I think, will be found in favor of it. Those who are opposed to it for the most part regard only present effects, the unpleasantness which the one to whom the system is applied may at first experience, and do not analyze the results to ascertain whether they are good or bad.

Naturally, all desire in the society of their associates to appear to the best possible advantage. If one possesses any disagreeable characteristic, a gentle insinuation that the same thing in another is very objectionable often suffices to correct it in him for whom the remark was intended. But if he be slow of comprehension, or stubbornly adheres to his old ways, he is more forcibly reminded of his failing, and in such a pointed manner that, rather than endure the sarcasms and witticisms of his fellows, he corrects it.

I knew a person, an incessant loafer, on whom publics and admonitions had little effect, but when the system of roughing was applied to him, he was unable to stand the pressure, and became an industrious student.

Another case comes to mind of a friend who had strange, unaccountable ways with him, - a habit of starting to recitations without his hat, of sitting up all night and sleeping during the day, of experimenting how long it would be before an exclusive diet of crackers and milk would make him relish anything else, and last, but not least, of occasionally going to sleep by the wayside. It was mildly hinted that a connection with an institution in the neighboring town of Somerville would be more beneficial than a course at college. I am glad to say that he is now an altered man.

It has been told me that a classmate was exceedingly pleased with a story, which finally lost its point by the frequent repetitions he gave it. His friends wished to turn him from the error of his ways. Consequently, one day when at dinner and engaged in the recital of his favorite story, he was suddenly astonished by all beginning to sing, and his ears drank in the familiar melodies of "Auld Lang Syne," interspersed with occasional calls for a well-known dog named Tray. It is needless, perhaps, to add that he has not lately regaled his friends with that story. These, however, are only specific cases, coming under my own personal observation, and mentioned as illustrations. Every one is doubtless aware of similar examples.

In college circles, owing to this very prevalence of roughing, a person is guarded in his expressions, and assures himself of the correctness of statements before venturing to make them. It renders him more careful and less apt to blunder through fear of jesting at his expense. But it is the power which it gives one to turn the laugh upon the attacking party, to parry the pointed allusion and to return one equally or more forcible, the facility with which it enables us to flash back a repartee or retort, that especially recommends, instead of condemns, roughing. My intention is not to defend it in all its forms, but only as it bears in this one direction. He who adopts a profession which is likely to lead him to address public meetings, or may place him in the legislative halls, must have this power of reply fully developed. Though his passion may be wrought up, his knowledge comprehensive, and his imagination vigorous, yet he who pleads lacks something. A man may begin to speak burning with enthusiasm, influencing by his persuasive eloquence; he may by his keen perception bring weighty arguments from threatening facts; yet his armor is defective, and the weak spot will be detected by his adversaries. To be successful, he must be equipped and ready for every interruption and questioning, innuendo and repartee, and send back the quick and witty response : if he hesitates, he is conquered. The wise man often becomes disconcerted and loses his sagacity in consequence of a keen repartee which may even live longer than the speech itself. That speaker contends at great odds - if, indeed, he is not effectually silenced - whose voice is drowned by uproarious laughter. All undergraduates know that roughing creates the habit of giving a ready reply; in fact, I can think of no method by which it is more successfully cultivated. Upon this ground, then, the custom which is so bitterly attacked by some is upheld. I hope it will not be inferred that I am defending any one for offering insults to another under the mere pretence that he is endeavoring to correct him. It would be presupposing a lack of common sense on the part of undergraduates to imagine that they would overstep the bounds of propriety in this line. Collegians generally have too high a regard for the feelings of others to commit themselves in that manner. Of course the thing can be carried to excess; so can everything else. It is as a means of toning down a too flashy style, or of pointing out in a pleasant way one's faults, and perhaps even of criticising in some degree his manners, that it is sanctioned.

A. C.