ry of Harvard University.

"At the period when Harvard College was founded," says that
gentleman, "one of the modes of punishment in the great schools of
England and other parts of Europe was corporal chastisement. It
was accordingly introduced here, and was, no doubt, frequently put
in practice. An instance of its infliction, as part of the
sentence upon an offender, is presented in Judge Sewall's MS.
Diary, with the particulars of a ceremonial, which was reserved
probably for special occasions. His account will afford some idea
of the manners and spirit of the age:--

"'June 15, 1674, Thomas Sargeant was examined by the Corporation
finally. The advice of Mr. Danforth, Mr. Stoughton, Mr. Thacher,
Mr. Mather (the present), was taken. This was his sentence:

"'That being convicted of speaking blasphemous words concerning
the H.G., he should be therefore publickly whipped before all the
scholars.

"'2. That he should be suspended as to taking his degree of
Bachelor. (This sentence read before him twice at the President's
before the Committee and in the Library, before execution.)

"'3. Sit alone by himself in the Hall uncovered at meals, during
the pleasure of the President and Fellows, and be in all things
obedient, doing what exercise was appointed him by the President,
or else be finally expelled the College. The first was presently
put in execution in the Library (Mr. Danforth, Jr. being present)
before the scholars. He kneeled down, and the instrument, Goodman
Hely, attended the President's word as to the performance of his
part in the work. Prayer was had before and after by the
President, July 1, 1674.'"

"Men's ideas," continues Mr. Peirce, "must have been very
different from those of the present day, to have tolerated a law
authorizing so degrading a treatment of the members of such a
society. It may easily be imagined what complaints and uneasiness
its execution must frequently have occasioned among the friends
and connections of those who were the subjects of it. In one
instance, it even occasioned the prosecution of a Tutor; but this
was as late as 1733, when old rudeness had lost much of the
people's reverence. The law, however, was suffered, with some
modification, to continue more than a century. In the revised body
of Laws made in the year 1734, we find this article:
'Notwithstanding the preceding pecuniary mulcts, it shall be
lawful for the President, Tutors, and Professors, to punish
Undergradu