It Happened at Harvard: The Story of a Freshman Named Maxwell

WHEN several Harvard students were indicted by the Grand Jury of Middlesex County on various charges of trespass and assault, and a far larger number were suspended from school, the President of Harvard College issued a statement to defend his actions. It judiciously began: "A series of trespasses having been recently committed upon the buildings and property of this seminary, of a most injurious and disgraceful character, accompanied by a succession of disturbances, extraordinary and without cause, or apology, it has been deemed the duty of the faculty to communicate to the parents or guardians of each member of the Institution, the nature and course of these outrages." The year of this incident was 1834.

Only last year President Pusey, when citing the difficulties with students in his annual report to the Board of Overseers, commented that "possibly there were years comparable in difficulty to the 1830's." In that report President Pusey went on to deplore the combination of "discontent" and "strong passion" which threatened to disrupt the college community. Then, prophetically, he concluded. "And the end is not yet."

Indeed, the events of this academic year would draw the analogy between Harvard's past history and its present dilemmas even closer.

The academic year began quietly enough. The then President, Josiah Quincy, was starting a successful drive to secure money for a new building to house the Harvard Library, a project that was sorely needed by the College. The year previous President Andrew Jackson had come to Harvard, and the Corporation with some fuss, had bestowed an honorary degree on him. But this year the Corporation and the Board of Overseers seemed to be living in quiet harmony.

However, late in the spring student trouble began. The original incident was small: a freshman named Maxwell refused to recite his Greek lessons. His instructor, Mr. Durkin, reacting to this provocation with speed and strength, hotly demanded that Maxwell obey. Maxwell adamantly refused, stating that he did not recognize his Instructor's authority to command obedience. The next day Maxwell was called to President Quincy's office to explain the incident; two days later he again was called before the President, and when he left the second time he had requested permission to withdraw from the University. If in those days the administration knew that from small seeds large and disruptive oak trees grow, they failed to detect a seed in this incident.

Yet, according to the Diary of George Moore, a senior, "The class are up in arms against their Instructor, Mr. Durkin, and the Government." That night at Chapel services, which the College rules required everyone to attend, the Freshmen disrupted the proceedings by constantly scraping their feet, and throwing out firecrackers. The attention of the President became riveted on the Freshmen, but his only response to their outburst was a high rise in temper.

Then, a group of students took the issue up more directly. That evening an unknown number of students stole into the recitation room of Mr. Durkin to make their point. They made it with force. "The recitation room was wholly demolished," reported Moore, "all the glass broken--and all the furniture broken and thrown out the window." The College government was incensed by this outrage.

The immediate response of the administration to this incident was to bring in night watchmen to guard the University property. But this action only added fuel to the fire because two days later apparently the same group of students stoned the watchmen.

In the meantime, the large majority of Freshmen, now joined by several upperclassmen, continued their original and more mild tactics of disrupting both the morning and evening Chapel services. To add a voice to their noise, the Freshmen called a class meeting to discuss the incidents.

Over the ensuing weekend things quieted down. But on Monday President Quincy called in prominent members of the Freshman and Sophomore classes. In unequivocal terms with a voice that shook in rage, he told the students that it was the duty of the Faculty and the determination of the Corporation to punish those students who had destroyed and trespassed on University property. If President Quincy had meant to knock the wind out of the disturbances, his statement had the opposite effect.

The threat and the tone in which it was given alienated more students than it scared. The Chapel disturbances were taken up by an even larger number than before that evening. Thus, on the next day President Quincy retaliated by dismissing two students from the College--Trask of the Sophomores and Barnwell of the Freshmen.

The action of the President and the government of the College caused an immediate uproar. There was a general feeling that Barnwell was totally innocent of any part in the disturbance, and, as a result, the students called a meeting in which it was decided to petition the government and ask for the reinstatement of Barnwell. The Petition "was accordingly signed by most of the members of the College," sent to President Quincy with the request that it be answered by the next day.

In addition to the petition a vote was taken to cease the hostilities, but the Sophomore Class refused, and rather than cease the disturbances they decided to vacate their seats in Chapel. The Sophomores, then, did not attend Chapel that evening or the next morning.

President Quincy did not answer the petition the next day. Pressing to blunt the protest instead, the Government of the College decided to suspend one Freshman and one Sophomore the next day. Consequently the noise at evening Chapel increased although the Sophomores still left their seats vacant.

The President issued a stern warning to the Sophomores after that, and the next morning the Sophomores appeared in Chapel after a three day absence. Yet still in defiance of the authorities they entered through the door usually reserved for the Freshmen. For this action President Quincy asked them to stay after the services were over, but the class, rather than submitting to the demand, marched out with the rest of the class in the normal way.

President Quincy then issued a statement which suspended the entire Class of Sophomores except for three members who were away at the time. The number of suspensions was thus 49.

On this day too the President announced what had been a veiled threat to the select group of Sophomores and Freshmen called before him a few days previous: public charges were being formally lodged against the Freshmen for the destruction of University property. An investigation was to be launched by the Middlesex County Grand Jury.

The Sophomores were ordered to be off the campus by two o'clock of that day. After that time the administration finally replied to the petition. Their statement announced a refusal to reinstate Barnwell.

Now each class called a meeting in open defiance of President Quincy. A vote for a general strike and open disruption of the University was taken. The motion shook the passions of the students, as it resolved: "a black flag [of rebellion] be raised before tomorrow morning on some of the college buildings--that the whole college dance around the rebellion tree tomorrow morning--that no prayers or recitations be attended until these grievances be redressed." The motion was carried in the Junior and Freshman Class meetings, but before the meetings were dismissed word had been passed down throughout the seniors from President Quincy, to the effect that none of the students had been permanently expelled from the College. This news reversed the decision of the two classes.

That evening the Freshmen took the seats of the Sophomores at Chapel. The next morning the Government of the College, continuing its policy of retaliation, expelled two Freshmen who had led the Class into Chapel and one Junior who was accused of making a disturbance in Chapel. Consequently, the Juniors in another defiant meeting overwhelmingly voted to wear Black crepe on their arms for the next three weeks to display their open hostility to the administration's injustice. They also resolved to publish a circular that would give a fair account of the events.

There was open rebellion. The campus was busy with activities. Said George Moore, "Groups are to be seen at all times in the College yard and around the doors of the buildings talking over this subject."

Several days later two more Freshmen were suspended. This occurred the day that the Junior Class Circular was published. In order to announce their publication a special meeting was held. "An effigy of President Quincy was hung with a rope about his neck from the Rebellion tree--a bonfire built near it--a loud shouting raised--and after exhibited for some time in this way, it was set on fire and burnt . . . this was done by the Junior Class and by a vote of the Class."

In an increasing swell of publications the administration and the students battled with words. The administration under the name of President Quincy issued a defensive circular accounting the events as they saw them. The next day the Senior Class began drafting its statement as a reply to President Quincy's circular. But the Board of Overseers also entered the engagement by appointing a committee to look into the affair. The report of this committee under the chairmanship of former President John Quincy Adams, a relative of Josiah Quincy, was an indictment of the Senior Class circular.

Things calmed down after this somewhat. But President Quincy had to prohibit students from going to Concord to view the public prosecution of the students which was being carried on by the Grand Jury there.

In late June the administration reopened the issue by calling on Freshmen to explain their role. In the process three Freshmen were suspended. The Seniors in the meantime were being examined about their circular. This resulted in the dismissal of seven Seniors just prior to their graduation. The last movement of any force to protest the injustice of the administration was made by the Seniors at this time. They voted to refuse their diplomas and their parts in Commencement. But when the administration threatened never to give them their degrees if they chose not to accept them then, they capitulated. The last protest fell.

The administration had won; but the administration had never dealt with the student's demands. Tactics had been met with tactics. Protests and petitions had been met with suspensions and expulsions. The University had the power and it won.

The price was high. Sixty-eight students had been dismissed from Harvard, almost a third of the 216 Harvard undergraduates. Three students were charged with trespass and one student was charged with assault by the Grand Jury in Concord.

What caused the disruptions at Harvard in 1834?

According to the circular of President Quincy, which has already been quoted, the disturbances were "without cause." Even in the statements by Quincy after the affair had concluded, he held to his original non-thesis. For the President of Harvard College in 1834, the only causes of the spiraling hostilities were the bad manners and impertinence of the students.

But the Juniors of 1834 had a different theory. They took the particular instance of the expulsion of Barnwell, and calling the incident unjust, showed that the source of the injustice was President Quincy. The statement began with a long justification of the actions of the Junior class. "It is undoubtedly the duty of those who are connected with any institution to obey its laws as long as they continue as its members," began the Junior class publication. "But when the measures of those who are at its head become such as appears to them unjustified and oppressive, if open resistance be improper, they have, at least, the right of submitting their cause to the impartial judgment of the Community."

After this Lockean statement, the circular went on to show the facts of Quincy's unjustifiable act. First, President Quincy was accused of saying to a group of several students, "We want no Southerners here; we cannot prevent your coming, but we don't want you; go somewhere else." Second, they attacked Quincy's call for public justice. "Mr. Quincy has formed a determination which no prudent man can approve. . . . He is about to introduce into academic discipline the full vigor of Criminal law." After affirming that they did not object to the laws of the institutions, only Quincy's methods of putting them into execution, the Juniors concluded: "Now nothing can be more evident than the unfitness of such a character for the direction of a mere literary institution."

The Senior class circular pushed this same line of reasoning but in a longer, and more eloquent form. The reason for their circular, they stated, was to refute the President's Circular "which contains a statement not belived by the students generally to be full and correct, and which they think is calculated to make a false impression on the public mind." After relating the events as they saw them, the students substantiated the Juniors' charges agains President Quincy and added one of their own: that Quincy actually told Barnwell when he arrived at Harvard that he did not like his attitude, and he had better watch out. In the end they commented in a vein of fairness "that the fault lies by no means upon the students alone. . . . We cannot but think that the renewal of the disturbances was owing to a want of discretion on the part of the President."

George Moore, who was a Senior but took no part in writing the document, seemed to agree with the judgments about the immediate events. He spoke with nodding approval in his Diary of "many of the classes thinking that Barnwell was unjustly expelled."

The newspapers of Boston at that time also took to editorializing about the incident. The Boston Courier, which was the paper read by those of the Federalist or Whig disposition, stated its whole-hearted agreement with President Quincy and the Gov- ernment of the University. On the other hand, the Boston Transcript, a Jacksonian paper edited by several recent graduates, put their sympathies with the students. "We have just heard of a new act of the wise men who guide the councils of our Alma Mater. . . ," the Transcript stated, "which threatens to ruin that ancient Institution."

But in another sense the disturbances at Harvard had deeper and more serious causes than those revealed in the escalation of tactics by both sides. Thus, the senior circular, while it spent most of its effort identifying the faults of President Quincy, eventually came to the short but essential conclusion: "Perhaps the circumstances which we have revealed have been only the immediate occasion of the recent disturbances. The causes have been long in operation."

Though the Juniors did not recognize any such causes, they wrote their circular in the height of their passion against President Quincy.

On the other side of the academic fence, the Government of Harvard College never recognized any connection between long range cause and events in the disruption either. Their tactic for the short range was to quell the disturbances, and their attitude to the larger issues was to chalk the protests up to poor manners and bad tempers.

Only the report which was submitted to the Governing Boards by former President John Quincy Adams made any effort to discover any cause for the events. Marking the extreme nature of the disturbances at Harvard, and recalling no previous such incident at the College, Adams finally connected a cause to these unusual events. Said Adams, drawing up all the venom he had for Andrew Jackson who had defeated and slurred him six years before, and then been given a Harvard degree, "the temper of the age" has affected students to consider themselves "in a standing rather of equality than of subordination to their instructors." It was the new age of equality that Quincy cited as the cause. At least in doing this he fingered a deeper reason for the extraordinary events.

Harvard's official Historian has made the only substantial and removed judgment of the event to date. Samuel Eliot Morison, in his definitive study of Harvard written for the tercentennial celebration at Harvard in 1936, and appropriately called Three Centuries of Harvard, reviewed the narrative of the events.

In a tender-as-possible comment Morison first says "Quincy never regained his popularity after that." But afterwards Morison goes on to state that the College never became a top rate institution until Eliot's presidency in 1869. He also expresses the notion that all students were unsatisfied with the kind of instruction that they were receiving at this time. And he subtly suggests that this may be the cause of the students' revolt. Morison never condemns anyone directly. But in his analysis he agrees in substance with a letter which the Boston Transcript republished in their paper with approving remarks. The Transcript's letter, apparently from a recent graduate, suggested (believe it or not) eight proposals which it thought would help the College run without further incident. The proposals included suggestions to abolish grading and end competition. It suggested strange new ways of dealing with faculty-student relations. The letter ended with the signature of "reform."

What emerges from all this is a judgment about past events. What one is faced with are similar events within the present crisis.

What one must keep in mind, however, is the comment by one student when he heard the narrative in this paper, "and they kept telling us it never happened at Harvard before."

(The documents cited here are from the Harvard Archives, and quotations have been reprinted with their kind permission.)