HARVARD IN 1655.

A manuscript copy of the laws of Harvard College in 1655 has recently been found among the papers of a deceased member of the Massachusetts Historical Society. It has been edited and published with an introduction by Dr. S. A. Greene, mayor of Boston and graduate of Harvard, to whom we are indebted for a copy.

"It was the custom then and it is now," says Dr. Greene, "for each student, on entering college, to have a copy of the laws, though now it is given to him in print. At that time, he was obliged to procure it for himself, and as paper was scarce, it is likely that the body of the pamphlet was sometimes handed down from one generation to another, and constituted a kind of transmittendum." This particular copy appears to have belonged to Jonathan Mitchell, a graduate of 1687, on his admission as a freshman.

Requirements for admission then were ability to "read and understand fully, Virgill or any such ordinary classical authors, and to readily make, speake, or write true Latine in prose, and hath skill in making verse, and is competently grounded in the Greeke language, so as to be able to construe and grammatically resolve ordinary Greeke - as the Greeke Testament, Isocrates and the Minor Poets, or such like, - haveing withall meet testimony of his towardness." Then follow rules of conduct, one (rule 6) being of the most comprehensive nature:

"All Students shall be slow to speake and eschew and in as much as in them lies, shall take care, that others may avoid all sweareing, lieing, curseing, needless asseverations, foolish talkeing, scurrility, babling, filthy speakeing, chideing, strife, raileing, reproacheing, abusive jesting, uncomely noise, uncertaine rumors, divulging secrets, and all manner of troublesome and offensive gestures, as being the [torn] should shine before others in exemplary life."

The college then as now kept a very careful eye upon the main chance in the matter of finances. Rule 13 is: "Every fellow commoner shall bring a piece of silver plate to the Colledge to the value (at the least) of three pounds, with his name engraven thereupon, which he may have the use of while he shall abide in the Colledge, and shall leave it to the propriety of the Colledge when he departs from it."

Another law is: "A scholler shall not use the English tongue in the Colledge with others schollers, unless he be called thereunto in public exercise of oratory or the like."

The penalty ordained for absence from prayers will recommend itself to many of the present day. Its leniency, compared with the laws now in force, is remarkable for that day:

"Each Student that shall absent himselfe from prayers (there being no Just reason given to and allowed by the President for such absence) shall for the first offence, being absent more than once or comeing tardy more than twice in a week space be punished a penny a time for once absent or twice tardy."

"Also in case any student shall be negligent to repaire to lectures in the Colledge with the rest of his classis: It is appointed such negligent persons be carefully observed by their tutors, who shall send for any such students and admonish them before the rest of his classis." Further offence in this way led to expulsion.

A very salutary rule was the following:

"If any Student shall weare long haire, or other wise offensive contrary to the former seventh law the President shall have power to reforme it, or as need shall require to make his address to any three or more of the overseers, who shall take order concerning it."

At first sight the above rule seems to wear an aspect of absurdity, but when carefully considered the full import of its meaning becomes clear. It must be said that the great influence of fashions upon character and morals is too often disregarded by those in authority. That provisions looking to the abolishment of long hair in this college should have existed is perfectly proper. It is a self-evident fact that long hair per se is subversive of all established rules and authority. It is needless to dive into antiquity to secure proofs in support of this proposition. Society declares it a fact of common experience and observation. The ferment into which this country was thrown by the recent advent of a disciple of the heresy of long hair from a certain effete despotism across the water, alone stands as a sufficient warning against the dangerous doctrine. Harvard's continued success (certainly in a social way) is to be traced to this small but important beginning of hers, and the supremacy that the college now holds in the matter of fashions is certainly due to it. If the revolutionary practice of wearing long hair had even once been admitted during its tender years, there is no telling what would have become of the college. The careful and nourishing development of centuries has brought to use the suave gentility of the festive "bangs;" had we started upon the other path, today we should undoubtedly be under the wild, weird sway of o'er barbarous aestheticism.

From the above considerations, we hope our readers will perceive the true dignity and farsightedness of the rule we have quoted.