News
Garber Announces Advisory Committee for Harvard Law School Dean Search
News
First Harvard Prize Book in Kosovo Established by Harvard Alumni
News
Ryan Murdock ’25 Remembered as Dedicated Advocate and Caring Friend
News
Harvard Faculty Appeal Temporary Suspensions From Widener Library
News
Man Who Managed Clients for High-End Cambridge Brothel Network Pleads Guilty
Well there's a new broom in the HYRC, or at least so we are told. So we went over to a "members only" meeting of the planning committee to see whether it was not just an old broom with a new handle. We're still not sure.
The broom closet still had its Taft campaign portraits up, we noticed, as we stumbled into a conference of two legal minds who were batting out their indifferences before the assembled multitude.
Apparently one of the courtroom magicians was a former counsel for the HYRC's weekly publication, and the other mastermind was the new counsel. The former gentleman was expressing a reluctance to turn over the organization's financial report without his getting a remuneration in the amount of $503.09. $3.09 was for stamps and the remainder for services rendered.
In the minds of some of the "ardent, inexperienced young men," sprawled casually around on the decaying furniture, the $500 seemed a trifle exorbitant, but, the plaintiff was of another mind, and a highly legalistic one. He had 32 pages of services rendered neatly itemized, and a few off-hand comments about his infirm grandmother, whose sleep had been disturbed.
Aside from his grandmother losing her rest, the now retired counsel, who termned himself an "overindulgent citizen," lost some sleep of his own. In underworldly dealings in behalf of the paper, he had solicited funds avidly. He quoted some of these dealings; in particular, the approach used toward one well-endowed Republican: "Lippy, I need some money." This technique had kept the publication from insolvency, but only through the efforts of counsel.
Said efforts, he thought, should be rewarded. Only he wasn't sure. "I'm not that sinister or impecunious," he said and quickly restored our faith in the Grand Old Party. But he went on to say that he hadn't been able to achieve a "rapport on a factual basis." We felt sorry about this, but no one else seemed to, and one motion was made to censure the gentlemen for embarassment. Of what we don't know; certainly not of riches.
Finally, the 32-page report was censured for its references to the "malicious" activities of the President, and unanimity was achieved. We hoped that it was, and left with our courage renewed and our blood congealed.
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.