A written copy of these regulations in Latin, of a very early date, is still extant. They appear first in English, in the fourth volume of the Immediate Government Books, 1781, p. 257. The two following laws—one of which was passed soon after the establishment of the College, the other in the year 1734—seem to have been the foundation of these rules. "Nulli ex scholaribus senioribus, solis tutoribus et collegii sociis exceptis, recentem sive juniorem, ad itinerandum, aut ad aliud quodvis faciendum, minis, verberibus, vel aliis modis impellere licebit. Et siquis non gradatus in hanc legem peccaverit, castigatione corporali, expulsione, vel aliter, prout præsidi cum sociis visum fuerit punietur."—Mather's Magnalia, B. IV. p. 133.
"None belonging to the College, except the President, Fellows, Professors, and Tutors, shall by threats or blows compel a Freshman or any Undergraduate to any duty or obedience; and if any Undergraduate shall offend against this law, he shall be liable to have the privilege of sending Freshmen taken from him by the President and Tutors, or be degraded or expelled, according to the aggravation of the offence. Neither shall any Senior scholars, Graduates or Undergraduates, send any Freshman on errands in studying hours, without leave from one of the Tutors, his own Tutor if in College."—Peirce's Hist. Harv. Univ., App., p. 141.
That this privilege of sending Freshmen on errands was abused in some cases, we see from an account of "a meeting of the Corporation in Cambridge, March 27th, 1682," at which time notice was given that "great complaints have been made and proved against ——, for his abusive carriage, in requiring some of the Freshmen to go upon his private errands, and in striking the said Freshmen."
In the year 1772, "the Overseers having repeatedly recommended abolishing the custom of allowing the upper classes to send Freshmen on errands, and the making of a law exempting them from such services, the Corporation voted, that, 'after deliberate consideration and weighing all circumstances, they are not able to project any plan in the room of this long and ancient custom, that will not, in their opinion, be attended with equal, if not greater, inconveniences.'" It seems, however, to have fallen into disuse, for a time at least, after this period; for in June, 1786, "the retaining men or boys to perform the services for which Freshmen had been heretofore employed," was declared to be a growing evil, and was prohibited by the Corporation.—Quincy's Hist. Harv. Univ., Vol. I. p. 515; Vol. II. pp. 274, 277.
The upper classes being thus forbidden to employ persons not connected with the College to wait upon them, the services of Freshmen were again brought into requisition, and they were not wholly exempted from menial labor until after the year 1800.
Another service which the Freshmen were called on to perform, was once every year to shake the carpets of the library and Philosophy Chamber in the Chapel.
Those who refused to comply with these regulations were not allowed to remain in College, as appears from the following circumstance, which happened about the year 1790. A young man from the West Indies, of wealthy and highly respectable parents, entered Freshman, and soon after, being ordered by a member of one of the upper classes to go upon an errand for him, refused, at the same time saying, that if he had known it was the custom to require the lower class to wait on the other classes, he would have brought a slave with him to perform his share of these duties. In the common phrase of the day, he was hoisted, i.e. complained of to a tutor, and on being told that he could not remain at College if he did not comply with its regulations, he took up his connections and returned home.
With reference to some of the observances which were in vogue at
Harvard College in the year 1794, the recollections of Professor
Sidney Willard are these:—
"It was the practice, at the time of my entrance at College, for the Sophomore Class, by a member selected for the purpose, to communicate to the Freshmen, in the Chapel, 'the Customs,' so called; the Freshmen being required to 'keep their places in their seats, and attend with decency to the reading.' These customs had been handed down from remote times, with some modifications not essentially changing them. Not many days after our seats were assigned to us in the Chapel, we were directed to remain after evening prayers and attend to the reading of the customs; which direction was accordingly complied with, and they were read and listened to with decorum and gravity. Whether the ancient customs of outward respect, which forbade a Freshman 'to wear his hat in the College yard, unless it rains, hails, or snows, provided he be on foot, and have not both hands full,' as if the ground on which he trod and the atmosphere around him were consecrated, and the article which extends the same prohibition to all undergraduates, when any of the governors of the College are in the yard, were read, I cannot say; but I think they were not; for it would have disturbed that gravity which I am confident was preserved during the whole reading. These prescripts, after a long period of obsolescence, had become entirely obsolete.
"The most degrading item in the list of customs was that which made Freshmen subservient to all the other classes; which obliged those who were not employed by the Immediate Government of the College to go on any errand, not judged improper by an officer of the government, or in study hours, for any of the other classes, the Senior having the prior right to the service…. The privilege of claiming such service, and the obligation, on the other hand, to perform it, doubtless gave rise to much abuse, and sometimes to unpleasant conflict. A Senior having a claim to the service of a Freshman prior to that of the classes below them, it had become a practice not uncommon, for a Freshman to obtain a Senior, to whom, as a patron and friend, he acknowledged and avowed a permanent service due, and whom he called his Senior by way of eminence, thus escaping the demands that might otherwise be made upon him for trivial or unpleasant errands. The ancient custom was never abolished by authority, but died with the change of feeling; so that what might be demanded as a right came to be asked as a favor, and the right was resorted to only as a sort of defensive weapon, as a rebuke of a supposed impertinence, or resentment of a real injury."—Memories of Youth and Manhood, Vol. I. pp. 258, 259.