orth, with a distinction of the classes by means of frogs on
the cuffs and button-holes; silk was prohibited, and home
manufactures were recommended." This system of uniform is fully
described in the laws of 1790, and is as follows:--

"All the Undergraduates shall be clothed in coats of blue-gray,
and with waistcoats and breeches of the same color, or of a black,
a nankeen, or an olive color. The coats of the Freshmen shall have
plain button-holes. The cuffs shall be without buttons. The coats
of the Sophomores shall have plain button-holes like those of the
Freshmen, but the cuffs shall have buttons. The coats of the
Juniors shall have cheap frogs to the button-holes, except the
button-holes of the cuffs. The coats of the Seniors shall have
frogs to the button-holes of the cuffs. The buttons upon the coats
of all the classes shall be as near the color of the coats as they
can be procured, or of a black color. And no student shall appear
within the limits of the College, or town of Cambridge, in any
other dress than in the uniform belonging to his respective class,
unless he shall have on a night-gown or such an outside garment as
may be necessary over a coat, except only that the Seniors and
Juniors are permitted to wear black gowns, and it is recommended
that they appear in them on all public occasions. Nor shall any
part of their garments be of silk; nor shall they wear gold or
silver lace, cord, or edging upon their hats, waistcoats, or any
other parts of their clothing. And whosoever shall violate these
regulations shall be fined a sum not exceeding ten shillings for
each offence."--_Laws of Harv. Coll._, 1790, pp. 36, 37.

It is to this dress that the poet alludes in these lines:--

"In blue-gray coat, with buttons on the cuffs,
First Modern Pride your ear with fustian stuffs;
'Welcome, blest age, by holy seers foretold,
By ancient bards proclaimed the age of gold,'" &c.[22]

But it was by the would-be reformers of that day alone that such
sentiments were held, and it was only by the severity of the
punishment attending non-conformity with these regulations that
they were ever enforced. In 1796, "the sumptuary law relative to
dress had fallen into neglect," and in the next year "it was found
so obnoxious and difficult to enforce," says Quincy, "that a law
was passed abrogating the whole system of distinction by 'frogs on
the cuffs and button-holes,' and the law respecting dress was
limited to prescrib