nines in this part of the country, as well as with those of several athletic clubs. We wish the Columbia Law School base-ball team all the success in the world. See to it that the blue and white can be entrusted to the Law School quite as safely as to the Arts or Mines.

THE habit, peculiar to many Law School men, of conversing during the lectures is one to be regretted and one which should be abolished. Disturbing to those here to learn, disrespectful to those endeavoring to teach, it shows, in the many who indulge, a painful lack or neglect of good

manners. The talkers recognize no limit of subjects, anything from the U. S. Constitution down to the entries at Guttenberg being discussed with an intelligence enjoyed, alas, by the few. The earnest student is often between two fires. Through one ear he hears of the Code, through the other of Carmencita. Reconcile these two subjects? Impossible! The result then is a most undesirable one. Namely, divided attention. On behalf of professors and students we ask those youths possessing the "gift of gab" and superfluous “animal spirits" to please discontinue the annoying habit.

At a regular meeting of the Middle Class, held on the second of March, the following men were elected officers for the ensuing term:

President, Frank Loomis Eckerson, A.B. (C. C.), New York; Vice-President, Herman Henry Baker, Richfield, N. Y.; Secretary, Robert Gibson, Jr., B.S. (U. S.), Dallas, Tex.; Treasurer, Charles F. Bates, New York.

Executive Committee: John D. Goss, A.B., Hudson, Wis.; Gustav R. Hamburger, New York; Samuel E. Smiley, (W. P. A.), New Brunswick, N. J.; Alfred E. Hinrichs, Brooklyn, N. Y.; Walter Scott Beadles, A.B., Jacksonville, Ill.

These gentlemen serve until the first meeting in October, 1891.

On March 9th the following notice was given to the Middle Class :

To the Middle Class:

A mass meeting is called for Monday evening, March 9th, at 7.30 o'clock, in the Middle Class Lecture Room of Columbia College Law School, for the purpose of passing a class resolution requesting the Faculty to confer the degree of LL.B. upon all members of the Middle Class, at the close of the present scholastic year, who shall be able to pass the examination heretofore given for such degree.

A full attendance of the members of both divisions is earnestly requested.

In accordance with this call for a mass meeting, the class was called to order at 7.30 by President Eckerson. At the request of the meeting Mr. Salisbury stated the reasons for calling the meeting. After a very interesting discussion the following motion was passed: "Moved

that a committee of twenty be appointed to draft suitable resolutions, to be signed by the members of the class, requesting the Board of Trustees to confer upon those members of the class who may pass their examination at the end of the present scholastic year the degree of LL.B." It was also moved and carried that the resolutions be reported to a class meeting before going to the Trustees.

Before the meeting adjourned a resolution was carried unanimously expressing the regret of the class at the resignations of Professors Dwight, Chase, and Petty, and extending to them the gratitude of all the members for the efficient work they had done in their behalf for the last two years.

The meeting then adjourned, with the understanding that the President would call another meeting as soon as the report of the Resolution Committee was ready.

The regular semi-annual meeting for the election of officers of the Junior Class of the Law School was held in Room 10 of the Law School Building, Wednesday evening, at 8.30.

The meeting was called to order by President Noble. Minutes of the previous meeting were read and approved.

It was moved that a committee of three be appointed by the Chair to draw up resolutions upon the retirement of Dr. Theodore W. Dwight. The President appointed Messrs. Clark, Gillman, and Bennett.

Upon motion, a committee of three were appointed by the President to look into the advisability of having a banquet some time this year. Messrs. Made, Stewart, and Whorburtin were appointed.

nines in this part of the country, as well as with those of several athletic clubs. We wish the Columbia Law School base-ball team all the success in the world. See to it that the blue and white can be entrusted to the Law School quite as safely as to the Arts or Mines.

THE habit, peculiar to many Law School men, of conversing during the lectures is one to be regretted and one which should be abolished. Disturbing to those here to learn, disrespectful to those endeavoring to teach, it shows, in the many who indulge, a painful lack or neglect of good

manners. The talkers recognize no limit of subjects, anything from the U. S. Constitution down to the entries at Guttenberg being discussed with an intelligence enjoyed, alas, by the few. The earnest student is often between two fires. Through one ear he hears of the Code, through the other of Carmencita. Reconcile these two subjects? Impossible! The result then is a most undesirable one. Namely, divided attention. On behalf of professors and students we ask those youths possessing the "gift of gab" and superfluous "animal spirits" to please discontinue the annoying habit.

We give in the following columns the impressions of a number of our best fellow-students with regard to the present condition of affairs in the Law School. The names of the writers are not given, but for the better understanding of our readers we have designated the class to which each gentleman belongs. No comments are made as to which are right or wrong. We hope that these few short summaries of the state of affairs may help to show the gentlemen of the Law School the best and manliest way in which to look upon our present troubles.

FROM '93.

A man paying the price asked for a certain article, and expecting to receive it, has a reasonable right to know why it has been replaced by an inferior article. So we, as students of the Law School, expecting to receive the instruction of the men who have made its name so famous, have a right to know the reason for the abrupt changes so lately brought about changes which deprive us of that which we expected, in that there are few of us who are willing to concede that the instruction given by Professors Dwight and Chase can be duplicated.

That they are due to the threatened ideas of a more aggressive policy on the part of the new President there can be no doubt. Granting that there may be some chance of improvement, it seems absurd that, after a school second to none has been builded on the outlines so well known to us all, the props which now so firmly hold it in place should be knocked away at one blow and inferior ones made to take their place.

It is strange, too, that this new policy should be borrowed from a school which, though great, is by no means the equal of Columbia. Is there not enough good timber in Columbia to reconstruct the policy, without importing it? If the "Harvard method" is so good, why have we not heard more of it? Had the majority wished any other method than that for which our Law School is so famed, it is quite likely we would have gone elsewhere to receive it. As to the new method of instruction (instituted by Professor Keener), requiring more and harder work, there seems to be no dissension, at least on the part of the Juniors. From what I can learn on the subject from the different men, nearly all concur in the statement that they do less work than they did under the old method; and further, there are few who do not condemn the new method. The result is awaited with much eagerness, and it is not going too far to say that many now interested will, after the close of the year, view it from a disinterested standpoint.

'92.

No one in the Middle Class can feel anything but regret for the retirement of Professors Dwight and Chase; whether the movement of which this is an unfortunateincident, is equally regrettable, quære. When haste to "get on " is in the bone, when we breathe an atmosphere of "attorneyism," both downtown and uptown,when we have so long surrendered ourselves to the influence of professors we respect and of a method approved by years and works in the only law school we know, it is hard for us to conceive that a different method, with a different goal, perhaps, may be as good as ours.

Such is probably the case, however, and our denials smack of ignorance and local prejudice. Let us face facts. Is there a thoughtful student who does not feel that much of the work here makes him mentally weaker, not stronger; that "cram" is too often the watchword, conceit often the chief result? Candidly, what is the net result of the brain-torturing hours spent over the text-books in contracts ? Possibly no better method exists. If "'t is true, 't is pity."

"Attorneyism" is rampant here, especially in the afternoon division, and has had things its own way. The school has tended to produce what most of us, it seems, desire to become, lawyers of memory and practical skill, attorneys in the English sense. I for one shall be glad to see it become a school for the few who wish to fit themselves broadly and deeply for the higher places, who wish to become. counsellors, barristers, "jurists," or whatever you may choose to call the lawyers of thought and power. It will be no injustice to us would-be attorneys who have neither time nor use for more than two or three hours of study per day, nor for even that unless strictly practical. Plenty of good schools are ready to aid us in the scramble.

This change in character is not assured, but promise is given by the new course, which, by the way, strikes me as very good, save for the extreme alternation of some of the parallel courses. The keynotes are struck by the abolition of the afternoon division, and required common-law pleading with an optional code.

The second means that the aim of the school will not be to grind every mind down to the keenest practical edge; the first means that a man who studies here must give proper time to his study. Haste has been in the saddle; thoroughness

seems to have seized the reins. Everything now depends on the choice of instructors.

A word to the insurgents. Such agitation often injures and sometimes ruins the institution, but the greatest harm is always to the agitators. Not the most sanguine can hope to influence events; why not then consult self-interest, be quiet now, and next fall go where their wants will best be met.

'91.

The recent newspaper criticisms concerning the late unpleasantness in connection with the Law School are as absurd as they are untrue. The tendency of all the articles is to depreciate the value of the instruction of a certain professor, and by so doing endeavor to praise the system pursued by others.

While heartily approving the instruction given by the very learned professors of 1889 -1890, we cannot speak in too high terms of the masterly manner in which the courteous gentleman, the learned instructor, and the lawyer, pursuing a so-called foreign method, directs the attention of the student to the foundation principles of the law. If this is the Harvard method, give us at least a little more of it.

'91.

The radical change of the method of instruction threatens to materially injure the Law School. Our President seems to ignore the fact that the fame of the Law School is solely due to the efforts of Professor Dwight. His extraordinary ability as an instructor, coupled with his faculty of securing the love and admiration of students, made the Law School what it is. An opinion, founded upon the experience of over a quarter of a century, should have