Harvard Law Review.
Published Monthly, during the Academic Year, by Harvard Law Students.
SUBSCRIPTION PRICE, $2.50 PER ANNUM. |
35 CENTS PER NUMBER. |
Editorial Board. | |
|
Editor-in-Chief. |
William H. Cowles, |
Bancroft G. Davis, |
George P. Furber, |
Robert S. Gorham, |
Homer H. Johnson, |
Blewett H. Lee, |
John M. Merriam, |
George R. Nutter, |
Paul C. Ransom, |
Henry M. Williams, Treasurer, |
William Williams, |
Samuel Williston. |
At the opening of a new academic year it will not be out of place
to call attention to the large number of students in the School, and to
the reasons which have led to the increase. The total number is now,
for the first time, over two hundred, and of these some thirty have
returned for the third-year course. This increase is due, in the first
place, to what we must believe is a growing interest in the School and
in its methods. We propose in the next number to publish a tabulated
statement, which will give in detail the number of students during the
past few years, and will show the proportion of those who come hither
from other colleges. For the present it is enough to cite the number
of third-year men as a proof of the appreciation with which the
School is regarded by those who have already had some opportunity
to test its methods.
Another reason, however, exists in this particular year for the increase in the number of new students. The Harvard Law School Association, which was started last November, at the time of the anniversary celebration, has had not only the effect of uniting the alumni, but has been the means of drawing the attention of the profession at large, particularly of students, to the Harvard Law School, and it is, perhaps, not too much to say, that the numbers of students can be traced, more or less directly, to the influence of the Association. We are glad to announce that through the kindness of the officers of the Association we shall be able to give information about the meetings, together with such official reports and announcements as may be of interest to the readers of the Review.
The form of Mr. Justice Kay’s order in McManus v. Cooke, 35 Ch. D. 681, furnishes an almost humorous illustration of the reluctance with which a mandatory injunction is granted. He allows a “perpetual injunction to restrain the defendant from permitting his present skylight to remain.”
